Cellular evolution concept/questions

So I decided to sit down today and try to work out the specifics of cellular evolution and hoped in a hour that I would have a working concept. But after going through the list of cells and what organelles will be available to you when you process enough of them, I had a few questions and a partial completed evolution tree. Then after reading the rest of Redstar's concept page I had a lot more questions.
(No they aren't for verification, but they're rather for discussion.)

But before I get into that I will give you a rundown of the concept.
Basically, if a cell is unsuccessful, the computer will access what it needs to be less unsuccessful. Really there's only 2 factors I could gauge success with and that was the cell's population, and if that population can produce more members than members are being consumed. That can be put into a simple equation. If that cell population is selected that turn, and is found that more members have been lost then gained. (gain-loss=population lost or gained. gained if positive, and lost if negative.)
Now keep that in mind as I will have to come back to that later.
There are two factors that could affect population: How much food each cell needs/is getting, and how well the cell can defend itself from other cells.

Then I thought that there were three ways to improve a cell either by improvement of an existing part, by an addition of another part, or by getting rid of a part to allow the cell to function differently. (eg getting rid of a cytoskeleton so the cell can envelope other cells from whatever part of the cell the skeleton is covering.)

So then, depending on how many cell population members were lost or gained, and for whatever purpose, the game will then pick one of a set of predetermined courses for the cell evolution to follow.

If the population has gained members for either reason then it would: improve the parts that made it successful.

If the population losses members because of the lack of food, then it would improve food parts, add them, or (if it has them) delete different food parts to make it more specialized, (Don't worry about the "x" type of part thing yet, I have the 17 proto cells and their organelles classified, it'll make more sense when I have the auto evo template up.)

If it losses members because of lack of defense then it would improve any defensive parts it has, add defensive parts, or delete a part to make the cell more specialized.

THERE IS A HUGE FACTOR THAT I HAVE NO IDEA HOW TO MANAGE AND THAT IS SIZE.
Quite frankly, it could be the byproduct of an evolution (for example the cell needs more space to accompany an organelle it would grow.) or it could be its own evolution (eg. the cell's not big enough to envelope another cell species, and that species is its primary food source.) so it's tricky.

I was about to create a tree we could use to create sets of random evolutions, but then I ran into a few problems so that leads me on to my set of questions. Keep in mind these are more discussion/agreement type of questions, and they're long. (some are just about the cell stage in general)

1st question:
How will we manage nourishment/materials?
I noticed that there's a lot of talk about carbohydrates, proteins and amino acids in red's concept but I quickly found that there was no set rules to them. Sometimes when you attacked a cell you got proteins or carbohydrates from them and had to transform them into amino acids with an organelle. And then on another hand some proto cells ate proteins that they created from amino acids and others did vice versa. And somehow carbohydrates came into play. That should have made no sense because it doesn't, but that's what was there.

Could anyone (I'm looking at you cali) figure out some sort of material hierarchy that I could work with? Like where we need certain materials to keep the cell in a healthy condition (ie can do repairs on the cell when injured) one material to give it energy, or one material to rule them al... I mean one material that you would need an organelle to decompose. Just something of that sort.


How will your original cell acquire new organelles if it can't process other cells?

There was also another problem I saw and it was simply this: If you're starting cell needs an organelle to process other cells, then how do we get that organelle? I've sort of narrowed the solution down to two options, either we A: let you envelope proto cells that give you parts but you cannot process nutrients from them. You also cannot eat eukaryotes(your rivaling cells) cells. or B: You start out with the ability to envelope anything you can fit inside you, but certain organelles will help you get more nutrients from them later. They both seem to work, so IDK which one is the better solution, and I don't want to create the tree without a solution.

If we have cellular evolutions then will we have cellular biomes?
Of course by cellular biomes I mean things like nutrient rich areas, or highly basic and highly acidic areas. (or anything of that sort really). The current evolution concept (which I love btw, good work) is centered around biomes, which means we need some division in our primordial soup so we can keep track of cellular populations. The question is how?

My current idea would be that you start out with a set map that spreads out acidic and basic areas via perlin noise. Materials would be spread out through the map based on the location of the acids and bases. (if you could find out how your resources would fit into different environments that'd be great anybody.)The map would be divided in ten sections based on the distribution of the acids and bases and nutrients. Only problem is will we have these 10 biomes running at once, should we only be able to have 10 running at a time, and is 10 a good number. (we'll probably need some programming done before we could answer those 3 questions I'd assume.) Now we can apply the auto evo. thoughts on that one?

Will we have photocells progressively given to us as our cell evolves, or will we have all of them at once?

Redstar had an idea that the more cells you get organelles from, the longer it will take for you to get more organelles. But there was a small flaw in it: what if the player and the AI cells envelope a set of cells that only lead to organelles that deal with nutrients? The answer is, they'd be down a creek without a paddle. So how does the idea that biomes will be assigned a different population of protocells based on their cast? So you'll have 5 photocells in each, one would deal with food, one would deal with movement, ect. and once every evolution turn there's a chance they will switch out with another type of proto cell of that cast.

Of course, the chance for this will start out as very low, and will increase over time (perhaps by one quarter of the value it was in the previous turn) so that other cells and the player will have a chance to acquire a new organelle, while at the same time being able to acquire new ones often.

Which brings me to my next question: How will AI cells acquire new parts?
I think the best way to manage this may be with a mathematical method in which AI cells will randomly peruse certain types of proto cells based off of a randomly created hierarchy. Then there's the question of how will AI cells "want" to pursue other cells. The solution to that would be simple: Either the other cell provides the needed energy, or the other cell is encroaching on that cell's food source. Which means we could get things like aggressive plant cells in an area that has a small amount of light.

that also brings me to this question: How will we incorporate various heat and light spots into the primordial soup, and how will these along with acids and bases shape the environment, and serve as a hazard?

I would assume extreme environments would be a hazard at first, but should there be a way for cells to evolve so they could tolerate it, or are we keeping things simple?


Could cells move into new biomes, what would happen if they did?

I started daydreaming the other day (ironically in biology class) and began to think about this, I came to the conclusion that if there was a large enough population of cells in a biome, then perhaps by chance in one evolution could a small population of those cells exist in a new biome? I thought why not, and if they're aggressive, and the biome they moved into has a lot of passive cells without predators, then there will be some neat adaptations.


How are we going to incorporate the bioluminescent organelle into evolution?
" 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"
This is a neat thing sure, but they're pointless, I cannot think of one way that any cell would possibly need bioluminescence. Perhaps there's a chance that in a biome that lacks light (why would there be in the first place?) or at night (putting in night and day would be tricky and unnecessary) or if we just wanted to piss somebody off and let their cell have that part at random if the game decides that it's time to take a Belgium on them (that's right I put in my own Belgiums!) then it would be useful. The only real use I see for it would be to attract other cells to you if you're a predator.

How do clone stickers?

Clone stickers scare me. If we are to have these I hope they are nerfed, and hardly ever chosen to be added to a cell because they have only one job right now and that's to make everyone's day bad. I also can't seem to put them into a niche as far as cellular evolution goes. They don't serve any purpose to a cell except directly influencing reproduction, and making any sort of food adaptation useless. (so then it could go into the food niche?) This is a serious dilemma for me.

Should gluers come later in game, or just be extremely difficult to consume?
Building on the idea of only letting certain biomes have certain proto cells at a time, what are we going to do with gluers? Basically, they bridge the gap between microbe, and multi cellular stages, it would be dumb to let you have at them as soon as your game starts. So how should this problem get solved? The only solution I can come up with is that they will replace a cell niche when the the members of that biom are evolved enough, or a set number of turns has past. (first solution is hard on the programmers but a bit more well tailord for each biom, while the second one could provide an interesting challenge for the player and produce interesting results.)


What effect will cell organelles have on cell colonies in multi cellular stage?

There is another question that needs to get answered after that which is: Can we only combined with cells of our own species?
I assume the answer to that is yes, it just makes sense. So building off of that answer I would figure that you would be able to have cellular colonies that share the function of your oldest, and mostly used organelles. The same would go for the AI so that means plant cells would evolve into plants, and carnivore cells will evolve into carnivores.


Well I hope you had fun reading that as I did typing it. Once all of these questions can get answered I will be able to get some work done on cellular evolution paths, and ultimately I think when these questions get answered the cell stage may solely be a coding project.

After all of this there is but one major hurdle: teaching the cellular editor how to add parts to a cell so it looks nice, but as long as we use a gradual/procedural/not a random system, it shouldn't be too hard.

I'm going to post my best answers to your questions as I read them.

Quote :

I noticed that there's a lot of talk about carbohydrates, proteins and amino acids in red's concept but I quickly found that there was no set rules to them.

Carbohydrates are molecules like sugars that provide energy for your cell. Amino acids are the units that make up proteins. Proteins are nothing but very specific amalgamations of amino acids. Therefore, you would need a digestive enzyme (which is also a protein, an enzyme is a protein that speeds up a chemical reaction) to break down proteins into amino acids, otherwise you would just get amino acids that were laying around when you "eat". Carbohydrates are found in all living things, the easiest and most efficient way to "eat" them is to eat plants, since they produce their own carbohydrates.

Quote :

How will your original cell acquire new organelles if it can't process other cells?

Your option 2 seems good here.

Quote :

If we have cellular evolutions then will we have cellular biomes?
Of course by cellular biomes I mean things like nutrient rich areas, or highly basic and highly acidic areas. (or anything of that sort really). The current evolution concept (which I love btw, good work) is centered around biomes, which means we need some division in our primordial soup so we can keep track of cellular populations. The question is how?

Why thank you, I devised most of the current biome based evolution concept. We also have thought of making biomes, But another idea was to just populate your environment with random (or almost random) heat, pH, and light values. You could move about a larger environment as your tolerance to these values increases or changes.

Most of these other questions seem to be about biomes as well, which I don't want to incorporate in cell stage.

On a side note, if we do partner with Space Engine, who elese is in favor of programming top-down, from galaxy to animal, Instead of bottom up, starting with cell stage? I don't think anyone here is really, really excited about cell stage, and it's the thing we are least sure of, conceptually. It's also probably the least appealing to players.

Thanks for your answers I'll see what I can do as far as far as mapping out a cellular evo system.
And I think doing the game top to down may be a good idea. I would imagine we would have to go back and forth a bit programming wise. Like we do a space prototype, then an organism editor so we can add your race to space, and then add an outfitter, then add outfitted models to space, back and forth things like that. But that will definitely create more interest then doing it from the bottom up.

Wow, epic post. That was probably the longest post ever posted.

Well, I think Scio's answered most of your questions. I think top down would be a good approach. Then cell stage could have day and night, and a location on a planet. We wouldn't bother with that otherwise.

So, if we started with space, what next? We would need to get some organisms to populate the place, so would we start with super-auto-evo-ed templates and make some space-farers in an editor, then bridge the gaps? Then later, we could add cell and ascension (Hooray for post-ascension time wars!)

The Uteen wrote:

Wow, epic post. That was probably the longest post ever posted.

Well, I think Scio's answered most of your questions. I think top down would be a good approach. Then cell stage could have day and night, and a location on a planet. We wouldn't bother with that otherwise.

So, if we started with space, what next? We would need to get some organisms to populate the place, so would we start with super-auto-evo-ed templates and make some space-farers in an editor, then bridge the gaps? Then later, we could add cell and ascension (Hooray for post-ascension time wars!)

so we can say that this concept is kind of done.

Well, programming top-down will certainly be more interesting, but I'm not really sure how it would be even done. I mean, making spacefaring race first, then planet-wide, then industrial, medieval, ancient, cave and after all this the 'creature stage' with evolution and all.. Nightmare. I think we should begin from the middle - in the creature stage. It will make it way easier when the civilisations get on the scene, and should be interesting enough for everyone. The cell stage can be added last.

Commander Keen wrote:

Well, programming top-down will certainly be more interesting, but I'm not really sure how it would be even done. I mean, making spacefaring race first, then planet-wide, then industrial, medieval, ancient, cave and after all this the 'creature stage' with evolution and all.. Nightmare. I think we should begin from the middle - in the creature stage. It will make it way easier when the civilisations get on the scene, and should be interesting enough for everyone. The cell stage can be added last.

But when bio-engineering comes around, we will need the editor ready.

All this logic is making me think we should do this in order...

How about we stick with doing it chronologically, but maybe come up with a space prototype (but no orgs) while we do it? Space will let us figure out how to make stars, and make planets, and how to populate them with biomes and let us get the universe ready for when the organism part of the game catches up.

Doing the rest of the game and then sticking on cellular and colonial last will just be asking for a dodgy transition. Cell is the simplest, being top down and generally simple, and so the logical first thing to do is cell. When we have more programmers and the almighty Roadkill knows how to deal with auto-evo, the more complicated things will be more achievable.

And we get the inspiration of getting to organism mode and all the planets are out there waiting to be visited, but can't be because we haven't made that part yet.

Commander Keen wrote:

Well, programming top-down will certainly be more interesting, but I'm not really sure how it would be even done. I mean, making spacefaring race first, then planet-wide, then industrial, medieval, ancient, cave and after all this the 'creature stage' with evolution and all.. Nightmare. I think we should begin from the middle - in the creature stage. It will make it way easier when the civilisations get on the scene, and should be interesting enough for everyone. The cell stage can be added last.

When I say top, down, I mean having:
a galaxy
stars
solar systems
planets
biomes on those planets
organisms in those biomes

if we do get to play with space engine, this can be done fairly simply. That gets us down into a comfortable creature stage. from there we can go on to the TE and nations and that sort of thing.

sorry for OT

~sciocont wrote:

sorry for OT

Eh it's alright all of that was fairly important to discuss.

(most of this was already posted but it focuses just on 3 organelles)

But anyways what should I do with the bioluminescent organelle? It seems to have no use. I think right now there should be a chance that if a selected species is successful that it may receive that organelle. Each time it is selected to evolve and is successful that chance increases.

And then there's clone stickers, they're too useful. I suppose, like bioluminescence, if a cell selected to evolve is unsuccessful that it has a small chance to receive it, and if it continues to be unsuccessful then that chance slightly increases. Of course the chance should only exist if the cell population lacks nurturance, and is losing population members to "predator" cells.

And if we aren't using biomes then perhaps we should only run a set number of NPC eukaryotes for all of microbe stage (like 20 maybe?). It would be easy for a computer to keep track of but then we need a way for the player to be able to see and interact with the individual cells.

And then of course gluer organelles, I figure they just won't exist in the primordial soup until cell stage has gone on for a bit, I'll work them into the evo tree some how.

Thoughts? (btw I will be working on a "pre-determined cellular mutation" tree today, should be interesting.)

Well here's the rough auto evo tree for microbe stage based off of Redstar's list of organelles.

Spoiler:

Before I get into that, the rough draft of the cellular evolution process:
(note: this is simply just the specifics of how the auto evo system will be applied to microbe stage, it isn't a new system.)

The success of a cellular population is defined by how many cells were lost or gained during one evolution turn. This can be determined by a simple equation: Cells gained-cells lost=cells gained or lost. There are two factors that affect gain and loss which are: How much nutrients the cells are receiving (more specifically if they're starving or not.) and how often a species is getting prayed on. As you can see on the chart, the 1stfactor is displayed as nurturance, and the 2nd as "defense".

(note: another good factor would be how often the cells reproduce, but instead the cell population could just double every evolution turn, or something like that.)

So, depending on which 2 factors lead to a population's success or failure, a predetermined set of mutations would be selected, and a specific mutation in that set will be randomly chosen.

So how does the computer assess which factors are leading to success and failure? well read this:

For nutrition:

If a lower percent of a cell's population died due to a lack of nutrition then they did to predators, and the cell population gains members, nutrition is considered a successful trait. (I will call this mutation set Nutrition1 for later)
If a higher percent of a cell's population died due to a lack of nutrition then they did to predators, and the cell population looses members, then nutrition is considered an unsuccessful trait . (mutation set: nutrition 2)
For defense:

If a lower percent of a cell's population died because of predators then they did by a lack of nutrition, and the cell population gains members, then defense is considered successful trait. (mutation set: defense 1)
If a higher percent of a cell's population died due to predators then they did to a lack of nutrition, and the cell population looses members, then defense is considered an unsuccessful trait
(mutation set: defense 2)

For both:

If the approximate (by maybe about 10%) percent of a cell's population died because of predators rather than by a lack of nutrition, and the cell population gains members, then both traits are considered a successful trait. (mutation set: Both 1)

If the approximate percent of a cell's population died because of predators rather than by a lack of nutrition, and the cell population looses members, then both traits are considered an unsuccessful trait. (mutation set: both 2)
If a cell's population growth is approximately average (still by about 10%) for any reason, the cell population is considered unsuccessful , and the appropriate mutation set is selected.

The only thing I don't know how to manage is how NP cellular populations will get new organelles, but I figure they could just be randomly "given" them somehow.

Now the organelle function list.

Nutrient related organelles:

(new nutrient source)

Thermoplast: transforms heat into nourishment (carbohydrates)

Chloroplast: which transforms light into nourishment (carbohydrates)

Dissolver (could call it an Enzyme capsule, thoughts?): double nourishment from absorbing Protein, and allows cells with Walls to be consumed. (note, is both a new nutrient source organelle, as well as an improvement organelle)
(improved nutrient source)

Lysosome: double nourishment from consuming Cells (only will occur in predatory cells.)
Mitochondria: doubles nourishment from carbohydrates.

Producer: double nourishment from absorbing Amino Acids, and allows damaged cell components to be replaced. (note is both a nutrient improving organelle, as well as an internal defense organelle.)

Defense related organelles:

(internal)

Vacuole: can store material to be digested, or compartmentalize harmful substances (like poison or injected reproductive material).

(external)

antiphagocytic capsule: keeps cells from being absorbed by other cells by producing an outer coating of enzyme "slime"

Cell wall: forms a protective barrier around the cell

(Movement and weapon organelles fall under the nutrient and defense categories.)

Movement related organelles:

(not going to bother with flagellum, cilia or lamellipodium)

Microfilament: Allows cell to move in an amoeba like fashion.

(another note: one of the movement organelles will be randomly selected for a cell at the beginning of microbe stage).

Weapon related organelles:

Poison Pilus: a pilus (hypodermic spike) that injects poison.

Shiner: An organelle that glows when its cell feeds, attracts light eating cells to the cell with this organelle.

Other:
(these two organelles have they're one niche in the tree as they would only be added in unique cases)

Gluer: grants the ability to bond with other cells of your type.
(will not show up until later in the microbe stage, could only be added if the population selected is successful.)

Clone pilus: a pilus (hypodermic spike) that can create clones of the player cell in this manner.

Now that that is out of the way there's the problem of the clone pilus, and clone stickers in general. They are scary, and could terribly modify the odds for anyone species. Right now I think they could only be given to a cell population that is about to go extinct and will be removed once the species is selected and is successful. As for the proto cells themselves, I figure you would have to consume them in a way that they don't stick you, or you need a vacuole to consume them without being turned into one of them.

These little buggers are hard to deal with in a game play perspective, and I'm not too sure how to deal with them.

Oh yes and the size factor, for defensive and nutritional purposes a cell would increase its size (so it could eat something else, or be eaten) and if it wasn't getting enough nutrition, it may shrink to conserve nutrients. Works?

So then, I will be meticulously mapping out mutations with this tree to fill in the in the mutation sets, but I wanted to show you all this first. If I missed anything in this post or if something seems confusing please ask me to clarify.


Aaaaand now I'm done.

Looks great to me. Although you're leaving out death by heat and acidity. Both could use the same system as predation and nutrition.

On the balancing of pilus improvements, perhaps there is a large energy trade-off? This could make an interesting mechanic, with the player at first thinking they have a sweet deal and then realising there is not enough nutrition for their sprawling cell population and suddenly dying back to more sustainable levels.

Scio, I'll see what I could do for enviromental resistance, it will probably involve a system similar to size where there's no organelle involved, but an overall change. (probably at a cost of energy, also size could be an adaptation to heat.) But yah classifying it as something other than defense or nutrition will probably be necessary.

Alaska, that's a brilliant idea. The only flaw is that there could be a slight possibility a cellular population may go extinct, but actually if you can't absorb clone stickers without a vacuole, the population of the primordial soup may not be endangered by a eukaryote with that adaptation by then. Of course with the energy trade off in mind, any cell with the clone pilus will only be replacing itself most of the time.

The Uteen wrote:

Commander Keen wrote:

Well, programming top-down will certainly be more interesting, but I'm not really sure how it would be even done. I mean, making spacefaring race first, then planet-wide, then industrial, medieval, ancient, cave and after all this the 'creature stage' with evolution and all.. Nightmare. I think we should begin from the middle - in the creature stage. It will make it way easier when the civilisations get on the scene, and should be interesting enough for everyone. The cell stage can be added last.

But when bio-engineering comes around, we will need the editor ready.

All this logic is making me think we should do this in order...

How about we stick with doing it chronologically, but maybe come up with a space prototype (but no orgs) while we do it? Space will let us figure out how to make stars, and make planets, and how to populate them with biomes and let us get the universe ready for when the organism part of the game catches up.

Doing the rest of the game and then sticking on cellular and colonial last will just be asking for a dodgy transition. Cell is the simplest, being top down and generally simple, and so the logical first thing to do is cell. When we have more programmers and the almighty Roadkill knows how to deal with auto-evo, the more complicated things will be more achievable.

And we get the inspiration of getting to organism mode and all the planets are out there waiting to be visited, but can't be because we haven't made that part yet.

I don't want to write an editor. I want to write a creature stage. That said, I'll probably write a planet renderer first, and then fish, and then walking Belgium.

Honestly, editors seem kinda lame to me. This isn't spore, it's a simulation.

roadkillguy wrote:

The Uteen wrote:

Commander Keen wrote:

Well, programming top-down will certainly be more interesting, but I'm not really sure how it would be even done. I mean, making spacefaring race first, then planet-wide, then industrial, medieval, ancient, cave and after all this the 'creature stage' with evolution and all.. Nightmare. I think we should begin from the middle - in the creature stage. It will make it way easier when the civilisations get on the scene, and should be interesting enough for everyone. The cell stage can be added last.

But when bio-engineering comes around, we will need the editor ready.

All this logic is making me think we should do this in order...

How about we stick with doing it chronologically, but maybe come up with a space prototype (but no orgs) while we do it? Space will let us figure out how to make stars, and make planets, and how to populate them with biomes and let us get the universe ready for when the organism part of the game catches up.

Doing the rest of the game and then sticking on cellular and colonial last will just be asking for a dodgy transition. Cell is the simplest, being top down and generally simple, and so the logical first thing to do is cell. When we have more programmers and the almighty Roadkill knows how to deal with auto-evo, the more complicated things will be more achievable.

And we get the inspiration of getting to organism mode and all the planets are out there waiting to be visited, but can't be because we haven't made that part yet.

I don't want to write an editor. I want to write a creature stage. That said, I'll probably write a planet renderer first, and then fish, and then walking Belgium.

Honestly, editors seem kinda lame to me. This isn't spore, it's a simulation.

This is a simulation, but the only way that we know how to make creatures is based on the OE concept, and, let's face it, making realistic alien fauna just sounds like a blast. Also, check the latest devblog, there's some important programming news, which sparked the discussion of top down in the first place.
[/ot]

~sciocont wrote:

roadkillguy wrote:

The Uteen wrote:

Commander Keen wrote:

Well, programming top-down will certainly be more interesting, but I'm not really sure how it would be even done. I mean, making spacefaring race first, then planet-wide, then industrial, medieval, ancient, cave and after all this the 'creature stage' with evolution and all.. Nightmare. I think we should begin from the middle - in the creature stage. It will make it way easier when the civilisations get on the scene, and should be interesting enough for everyone. The cell stage can be added last.

But when bio-engineering comes around, we will need the editor ready.

All this logic is making me think we should do this in order...

How about we stick with doing it chronologically, but maybe come up with a space prototype (but no orgs) while we do it? Space will let us figure out how to make stars, and make planets, and how to populate them with biomes and let us get the universe ready for when the organism part of the game catches up.

Doing the rest of the game and then sticking on cellular and colonial last will just be asking for a dodgy transition. Cell is the simplest, being top down and generally simple, and so the logical first thing to do is cell. When we have more programmers and the almighty Roadkill knows how to deal with auto-evo, the more complicated things will be more achievable.

And we get the inspiration of getting to organism mode and all the planets are out there waiting to be visited, but can't be because we haven't made that part yet.

I don't want to write an editor. I want to write a creature stage. That said, I'll probably write a planet renderer first, and then fish, and then walking Belgium.

Honestly, editors seem kinda lame to me. This isn't spore, it's a simulation.

This is a simulation, but the only way that we know how to make creatures is based on the OE concept, and, let's face it, making realistic alien fauna just sounds like a blast. Also, check the latest devblog, there's some important programming news, which sparked the discussion of top down in the first place.
[/ot]

Anyway, the editors are going to come later. Genetic engineering only really gets good enough to deserve anything other than a cell editor in the future, we've got plenty of time to gather hundreds of programmers by then. Or maybe I'm being a bit too expectant. The point is, the editors aren't going to be needed for a while yet. You'll have an army of minions to do it for you when the time comes.

The Uteen wrote:

~sciocont wrote:

roadkillguy wrote:

The Uteen wrote:

Commander Keen wrote:

Well, programming top-down will certainly be more interesting, but I'm not really sure how it would be even done. I mean, making spacefaring race first, then planet-wide, then industrial, medieval, ancient, cave and after all this the 'creature stage' with evolution and all.. Nightmare. I think we should begin from the middle - in the creature stage. It will make it way easier when the civilisations get on the scene, and should be interesting enough for everyone. The cell stage can be added last.

But when bio-engineering comes around, we will need the editor ready.

All this logic is making me think we should do this in order...

How about we stick with doing it chronologically, but maybe come up with a space prototype (but no orgs) while we do it? Space will let us figure out how to make stars, and make planets, and how to populate them with biomes and let us get the universe ready for when the organism part of the game catches up.

Doing the rest of the game and then sticking on cellular and colonial last will just be asking for a dodgy transition. Cell is the simplest, being top down and generally simple, and so the logical first thing to do is cell. When we have more programmers and the almighty Roadkill knows how to deal with auto-evo, the more complicated things will be more achievable.

And we get the inspiration of getting to organism mode and all the planets are out there waiting to be visited, but can't be because we haven't made that part yet.

I don't want to write an editor. I want to write a creature stage. That said, I'll probably write a planet renderer first, and then fish, and then walking Belgium.

Honestly, editors seem kinda lame to me. This isn't spore, it's a simulation.

This is a simulation, but the only way that we know how to make creatures is based on the OE concept, and, let's face it, making realistic alien fauna just sounds like a blast. Also, check the latest devblog, there's some important programming news, which sparked the discussion of top down in the first place.
[/ot]

Anyway, the editors are going to come later. Genetic engineering only really gets good enough to deserve anything other than a cell editor in the future, we've got plenty of time to gather hundreds of programmers by then. Or maybe I'm being a bit too expectant. The point is, the editors aren't going to be needed for a while yet. You'll have an army of minions to do it for you when the time comes.

I think Genetic Engineering Is okay But what is The Point adding It?
you can only Create New Cells And Stuff but It's Like To create the main Creature.
and I Also think That Editors are Dumb, we are not spore

P.S
This is my 42 Post LOL

ido66667 wrote:

The Uteen wrote:

~sciocont wrote:

roadkillguy wrote:

The Uteen wrote:

Commander Keen wrote:

Well, programming top-down will certainly be more interesting, but I'm not really sure how it would be even done. I mean, making spacefaring race first, then planet-wide, then industrial, medieval, ancient, cave and after all this the 'creature stage' with evolution and all.. Nightmare. I think we should begin from the middle - in the creature stage. It will make it way easier when the civilisations get on the scene, and should be interesting enough for everyone. The cell stage can be added last.

But when bio-engineering comes around, we will need the editor ready.

All this logic is making me think we should do this in order...

How about we stick with doing it chronologically, but maybe come up with a space prototype (but no orgs) while we do it? Space will let us figure out how to make stars, and make planets, and how to populate them with biomes and let us get the universe ready for when the organism part of the game catches up.

Doing the rest of the game and then sticking on cellular and colonial last will just be asking for a dodgy transition. Cell is the simplest, being top down and generally simple, and so the logical first thing to do is cell. When we have more programmers and the almighty Roadkill knows how to deal with auto-evo, the more complicated things will be more achievable.

And we get the inspiration of getting to organism mode and all the planets are out there waiting to be visited, but can't be because we haven't made that part yet.

I don't want to write an editor. I want to write a creature stage. That said, I'll probably write a planet renderer first, and then fish, and then walking Belgium.

Honestly, editors seem kinda lame to me. This isn't spore, it's a simulation.

This is a simulation, but the only way that we know how to make creatures is based on the OE concept, and, let's face it, making realistic alien fauna just sounds like a blast. Also, check the latest devblog, there's some important programming news, which sparked the discussion of top down in the first place.
[/ot]

Anyway, the editors are going to come later. Genetic engineering only really gets good enough to deserve anything other than a cell editor in the future, we've got plenty of time to gather hundreds of programmers by then. Or maybe I'm being a bit too expectant. The point is, the editors aren't going to be needed for a while yet. You'll have an army of minions to do it for you when the time comes.

I think Genetic Engineering Is okay But what is The Point adding It?
you can only Create New Cells And Stuff but It's Like To create the main Creature.
and I Also think That Editors are Dumb, we are not spore

P.S
This is my 42 Post LOL

Genetic engineering will mainly just be a feat of science to begin with, but when the player gets to the space era and want to populate new habitable planets with their organisms, they may wish to create their own.

The next reason for genetic engineering is that, once the editors are unlocked, they can create organisms which can then be used in Sandbox Mode, which allows a greater level of customisation than ever before! With the editors, you can create incredible creatures, organic structures, anything you put your mind to. Combined with the incredible innovative flexibility of Sandbox mode, anything from your machinima movie epic, to your inspiring 'toss people into a black hole' level, even to your reconstruction of Gallifrey can look at its best, and truly be your own. Sandbox mode, use it now!

Putting aside for a moment my promotion of the mode I am the lead of (an inspiringly incredible lead though I may be), let me also mention that some people might want to start later on in the line of evolution, and so an editor will be important for letting them make something to start with.

Have I convinced anyone yet? I certainly somehow think they are more important than I did when I started this post.

Also, I think it needs saying, just incase: Please, no-one forget to quote me, we can't afford to loose this quantity of quotation, not after all this progress we've made at making the largest quote pile ever. Quote me. (reverse phycology, I know you won't do what I want you to, so I'm telling you to in reverse phycology not to and so you will.

The Uteen wrote:

ido66667 wrote:

The Uteen wrote:

~sciocont wrote:

roadkillguy wrote:

The Uteen wrote:

Commander Keen wrote:

Well, programming top-down will certainly be more interesting, but I'm not really sure how it would be even done. I mean, making spacefaring race first, then planet-wide, then industrial, medieval, ancient, cave and after all this the 'creature stage' with evolution and all.. Nightmare. I think we should begin from the middle - in the creature stage. It will make it way easier when the civilisations get on the scene, and should be interesting enough for everyone. The cell stage can be added last.

But when bio-engineering comes around, we will need the editor ready.

All this logic is making me think we should do this in order...

How about we stick with doing it chronologically, but maybe come up with a space prototype (but no orgs) while we do it? Space will let us figure out how to make stars, and make planets, and how to populate them with biomes and let us get the universe ready for when the organism part of the game catches up.

Doing the rest of the game and then sticking on cellular and colonial last will just be asking for a dodgy transition. Cell is the simplest, being top down and generally simple, and so the logical first thing to do is cell. When we have more programmers and the almighty Roadkill knows how to deal with auto-evo, the more complicated things will be more achievable.

And we get the inspiration of getting to organism mode and all the planets are out there waiting to be visited, but can't be because we haven't made that part yet.

I don't want to write an editor. I want to write a creature stage. That said, I'll probably write a planet renderer first, and then fish, and then walking Belgium.

Honestly, editors seem kinda lame to me. This isn't spore, it's a simulation.

This is a simulation, but the only way that we know how to make creatures is based on the OE concept, and, let's face it, making realistic alien fauna just sounds like a blast. Also, check the latest devblog, there's some important programming news, which sparked the discussion of top down in the first place.
[/ot]

Anyway, the editors are going to come later. Genetic engineering only really gets good enough to deserve anything other than a cell editor in the future, we've got plenty of time to gather hundreds of programmers by then. Or maybe I'm being a bit too expectant. The point is, the editors aren't going to be needed for a while yet. You'll have an army of minions to do it for you when the time comes.

I think Genetic Engineering Is okay But what is The Point adding It?
you can only Create New Cells And Stuff but It's Like To create the main Creature.
and I Also think That Editors are Dumb, we are not spore

P.S
This is my 42 Post LOL

Genetic engineering will mainly just be a feat of science to begin with, but when the player gets to the space era and want to populate new habitable planets with their organisms, they may wish to create their own.

The next reason for genetic engineering is that, once the editors are unlocked, they can create organisms which can then be used in Sandbox Mode, which allows a greater level of customisation than ever before! With the editors, you can create incredible creatures, organic structures, anything you put your mind to. Combined with the incredible innovative flexibility of Sandbox mode, anything from your machinima movie epic, to your inspiring 'toss people into a black hole' level, even to your reconstruction of Gallifrey can look at its best, and truly be your own. Sandbox mode, use it now!

Putting aside for a moment my promotion of the mode I am the lead of (an inspiringly incredible lead though I may be), let me also mention that some people might want to start later on in the line of evolution, and so an editor will be important for letting them make something to start with.

Have I convinced anyone yet? I certainly somehow think they are more important than I did when I started this post.

Also, I think it needs saying, just incase: Please, no-one forget to quote me, we can't afford to loose this quantity of quotation, not after all this progress we've made at making the largest quote pile ever. Quote me. (reverse phycology, I know you won't do what I want you to, so I'm telling you to in reverse phycology not to and so you will.

First... You convinced me

Secondly... I think I was quoting you one way or another

~sciocont wrote:

roadkillguy wrote:

I don't want to write an editor. I want to write a creature stage. That said, I'll probably write a planet renderer first, and then fish, and then walking Belgium.

Honestly, editors seem kinda lame to me. This isn't spore, it's a simulation.

This is a simulation, but the only way that we know how to make creatures is based on the OE concept, and, let's face it, making realistic alien fauna just sounds like a blast. Also, check the latest devblog, there's some important programming news, which sparked the discussion of top down in the first place.
[/ot]

We shouldn't have an engine written for us. Placing stars and planets in a galaxy is SIMPLE. My only problem is that of planetary data and rendering these spherical heightmaps. Ask that guy about planetary data, and how it is lod'd and rendered.

roadkillguy wrote:

~sciocont wrote:

roadkillguy wrote:

I don't want to write an editor. I want to write a creature stage. That said, I'll probably write a planet renderer first, and then fish, and then walking Belgium.

Honestly, editors seem kinda lame to me. This isn't spore, it's a simulation.

This is a simulation, but the only way that we know how to make creatures is based on the OE concept, and, let's face it, making realistic alien fauna just sounds like a blast. Also, check the latest devblog, there's some important programming news, which sparked the discussion of top down in the first place.
[/ot]

We shouldn't have an engine written for us. Placing stars and planets in a galaxy is SIMPLE. My only problem is that of planetary data and rendering these spherical heightmaps. Ask that guy about planetary data, and how it is lod'd and rendered.

His engine has pretty much flawless LOD transitions. If he joins, you guys should work together on the galaxy first, and then by the time you're done I'll have more specs for biome placement.

Also, if you two quote stack to that extent ever again, I'll shoot you both.

~sciocont wrote:

roadkillguy wrote:

~sciocont wrote:

roadkillguy wrote:

I don't want to write an editor. I want to write a creature stage. That said, I'll probably write a planet renderer first, and then fish, and then walking Belgium.

Honestly, editors seem kinda lame to me. This isn't spore, it's a simulation.

This is a simulation, but the only way that we know how to make creatures is based on the OE concept, and, let's face it, making realistic alien fauna just sounds like a blast. Also, check the latest devblog, there's some important programming news, which sparked the discussion of top down in the first place.
[/ot]

We shouldn't have an engine written for us. Placing stars and planets in a galaxy is SIMPLE. My only problem is that of planetary data and rendering these spherical heightmaps. Ask that guy about planetary data, and how it is lod'd and rendered.

His engine has pretty much flawless LOD transitions. If he joins, you guys should work together on the galaxy first, and then by the time you're done I'll have more specs for biome placement.

Also, if you two quote stack to that extent ever again, I'll shoot you both.

You mean "we'll have more specs," since I need to talk to you about freshwater systems and microbiomes. Um... I'll try and have our biomes categorized soon. Thanksgivingish.

My god, my browser page was just eaten by repetitive zombies. Seriously you two, forum games and trix are for kids. It was funny untill my eyes started bleeding.

P.S. Anyone up for taking this one to the next level?

If you mean the the quote, then no calli.

Anyways I'm a bit tied up on school work so I may not have some decent cleaning/work on cellular evolution done until next week, maybe sundayish. I'll see what I can do on paper though.

Also how exactly did you plan to visually evolve the creatures without having some sort of editors or parts Roadkill? I'm purely asking this out of curiosity and without any intention to sound sarcastic, the reason I'm asking is is that knowing that concept may help down the line. (or not so much down the line seeing as we're getting close to having programming for this game.)

Auto-Evo.

For example: say your creature is selected to have longer legs. The auto evo will lengthen the legs. Your creature is selected to have camoflage? Procedure for taking background colors out of the biome and using them as part of it's coloration.

Mathematically and programming wise, I am not certain exactly how this works, but there's a bunch of posts hanging out here which I can't be bothered to find right now that explain the concept.
Basically, we'll be using auto-evo for NPCs anyway (because spore-esque just generating larger creatures is kinda stupid,) and it should work fine for PC's as well, as they're not functionally different in the evolution area, just in whose driving them.