Old Thrive vs "New" Thrive

roadkillguy wrote:

MeowMan1 wrote:

Were it so easy....I think this thread is through.
We will not take out any stages.
Lets just stik to the original plan.

And what's that? Letting anyone and their dog submit an idea, fight over the current concept, only to have it "added" to the game?

A perfect example of the problems of having too many topics of discussion.

This is why we need to recover this thread, we're simultaneously talking about at least two topics: Removing stages from the game, and 'letting anyone and there dog submit an idea'. And there's no doubt more. The removal of stages proposition doesn't seem to be being argued for.

Well, unless this is just a very, very confusing topic about Thrive, it's universe, and everything else, I see a simple course of action: from now, lets leave this thread to just discussion about whatever the 'New Thrive' Roadkill talked about is proposing. That sounds like a controversial topic.



I shall begin a civilised, calm, and clear debate.

I wouldn't say everything that is suggested gets added to the game. The discussion on underwater civilisations was not only informative to many people, but provided great justification to why we shouldn't include them. Without people wandering in and questioning our established plans, we may not see certain flaws or incompleteness in them, so remaining with 'Old Thrive' may allow our ideas to become more developed and sturdy in the future. However, I'm not very clear with your side of the argument, so how exactly do you propose we limit the submission of ideas, Roadkill?

(Now that is how one partakes in constructive debate. )

The Uteen wrote:

However, I'm not very clear with your side of the argument, so how exactly do you propose we limit the submission of ideas, Roadkill?

(Now that is how one partakes in constructive debate. )

First off,

Quote :

Teh game should have goood grafix

Is not a valid submission.

We don't limit them, we ensure they're better and more educated on the subject.

Quote :

Hey I've done some research on shaders in OpenGL and depending on the state of the code I believe I have an idea on how they could be implemented.

Is fantastic.

Me, commander keen, guitar999111, bashinerox, and ai's-null could make a game with just the 5 of us, and it'd be just fine. Why? Because we know how to program, and we know how this stuff works. Anything we come up with is guaranteed to have a solid programatical backend.

Unfortunately, this forum has it backwards. You've designed a very in depth-game with many bells and whistles, and you expect programmers to program. Generally, indie games are started by a few developers, and the community helps add to it.

All of that said, yes, I believe the game should be chopped in half. But quite honestly it shouldn't matter, because 0 divided by 2 is still 0.

roadkillguy wrote:

First off,

Quote :

Teh game should have goood grafix

Is not a valid submission.

We don't limit them, we ensure they're better and more educated on the subject.

Well, that makes sense.

roadkillguy wrote:

More sense.

Indeed... Wisdom.

So we don't really have a choice here. What can be programmed in gets programmed in, and what can't be can't be. Looks like there isn't really much to discuss, then.