My interpretation of procedural generation is that, in additional to randomness, there is some overarching governing rules that determine various outcomes.
Consider everybody’s favourite - Dwarf Fortress. World generation is procedural, not random. It is random in the sense that the overall landscape is different and unique each time and it uses a seed number to ensure repeatable generation, yet there are clearly defined rules which determine world layout - what can be generated next to what and under what circumstances. It then also uses some simulation (weather, tectonics, etc) to further modify, or age the world. The result is random, yet rules govern how it ends up to help make it a more ‘natural’ world.
Or, put another way, procedural generation has connotations of some defined rule-sets directing the randomness to achieve a more desired outcome.
Edit, or to put another, another way - what MrPinguin said. Damn ninjas.
Within a week to 1 month: Most life will be extinct…the same people that roll rogues and one shot low level players in MMOs, will make it their job to destroy as much as possible. Never under estimate the number of miscreants who hate themselves and want to take it out on everyone else. Perhaps they have something in place, such as…if X goes extinct, generate X1. If not, they are in trouble, especially with a 4 man team. Procedural or not, there are only so many art assets which is the real limitation.
Trees with shark head bug!
Planet duping exploit. I found a way to dupe my planet that produces Foozle-diamonds that I can make Foozle-death-rays out of. Foozle-death-rays allow me to one shot planets, see number 1.
Why do these discussions happen on every single thread about a game that will feature ‘procedural’ content? The internet is vast and big and YOU can use it to get ALL the detailed info you want on what the differences are between pure random and procedural. Here (and do stop derailing the thread!):
If those links don’t work for you (they didn’t when i tried them!) then just use your search engine of choice to find out all the info you seem to need on the subject.
In practical terms, there is no difference. You are just discussing semantics. When a dev says “so my game makes random worlds” it doesn’t really mean the world is 100% pure random, usually there are some rules in the world generation. Believing random means literally 100% pure randomness is being a bit pedantic. It’s a general term that encompasses procedural methods.
I wrote a random map generator for Heroes III in the Armageddon’s Blade expansion. It was highly procedural. It started by selecting an abstract template for the map, which consisted of a list of connected zones with numeric properties. It placed the zones on the map while maintaining the connections. It then generated decorative obstructions, and again there was a highly structured set of rules for how it would select objects based on what was adjacent. It then placed treasure zones, where each treasure had a desired total value based on the numbers in the template. The specific treasures were random, as was the specific monster guarding them, but the total value and the total strength of the monsters had to fall in a specified range.
Throughout the history of computer games, “random” content has always followed rules like this. The term “procedural” has always been a more accurate description, but “random” is a lot easier for the layman to understand. We have never created anything as random as the posters in this thread seem to believe. I can’t even imagine how something truly random would work, since you always need a minimum number of rules. The main difference between good procedural content and bad content has been the rules - how many do you have, and how well did you think them out?
In practical terms, there is no difference. You are just discussing semantics. When a dev says “so my game makes random worlds” it doesn’t really mean the world is 100% pure random, usually there are some rules in the world generation. Believing random means literally 100% pure randomness is being a bit pedantic. In general terms “random” encompasses procedural methods.
In practical terms, there is no difference. You are just discussing semantics. When a dev says “so my game makes random worlds” it doesn’t really mean the world is 100% pure random, usually there are some rules in the world generation. Believing random means literally 100% pure randomness is being a bit pedantic. It’s a general terms “random” encompasses procedural methods.
There’s a big difference for this game, in terms of everyday understanding of the terms. There is only one galaxy in No Man’s Sky, and every player shares it (or at least they share the places and the significant events). There’s no “randomised galaxy” option like in, say, Civ.
That doesn’t really jive with what they’ve said. Though it’s not 100% clear at this point how the shared discovery features impact things on a practical level.
Does one or multiple players discovering a planet and sharing that suddenly make the entire rest of your own generated galaxy exactly the same? Because that’s not what I assumed.
This is exactly what I was trying to get at, and what my understanding of procedural generation is. I was trying to understand the semantic difference between calling a map for Civilization “randomly” generated whereas a Minecraft world is “procedurally” generated.
I was using this forum rather than the wide open internet, Zak Gordon, because I was guessing (foolishly hoping, perhaps) that people here have thought a bit about it w.r.t. computer games, and might have intelligent things to say. The other option, of course, is to go back to speculating wildly about a game for which there seems to be very little actual information (but that sounds very cool nonetheless).
FWIW, I had no problem with you asking your questions in the thread (and took a stab at addressing it). I felt it was relevant to the thread since this is a game touting its procedural content. Everyone has bad days or just particular pet peeves that allow an otherwise benign situation to set them off, I’m assuming that was the situation with Zak. :)
Does one or multiple players discovering a planet and sharing that suddenly make the entire rest of your own generated galaxy exactly the same? Because that’s not what I assumed.
It’s exactly what they said. From the RPS article:
Any planet you discover on your journey is marked on your galactic map, along with its name, its atmosphere and what resources you found there. If you choose to, you can then share that information with every other player, uploading it so that it’s shared across everyone’s galactic map.
You’ll get credit for discovering it. You’ll also, if the materials there are valuable, attract players to come visit. No Man’s Sky isn’t a multiplayer game, in as much as you’ll never see another player. But the galaxy is the same between everyone and actions of “significance” will be shared. If you kill a single bird, that won’t be shared. If you make an entire species of bird extinct, then those creatures will blink out of existence for everyone.
That means you might want to keep quiet about a planet of valuable resources, so others don’t come and deplete it. I also instantly start thinking of ways to be devious. Can I upload false information to the galactic map? Can I lure people to a system full of pirates and then, when their ships crash and burn, steal materials from their ghostly hulls?
It just seemed like ooomalley was just looking for the obvious, but only wanting one answer (“Yes procedural = random and nothing else”), and a couple of people called that out. But anyway, no i was having a fine day but now i need to address the issue that the internet (and people here) have more or less done for ooomalley. ‘Procedural content’ is not a new cool fad. It’s been around in computer games for a long time.
Of the top of my head, with no deeper reflection than the time it has taken me to write this sentence, i can think of Daggerfall (1996?) and Elite (1984?) that both had it as a core aspect of the games function (to create a vast world space with minimum overhead).
‘Random content’ is different no? It intimates no rules, ‘anything goes’. I don’t know any games that use ‘Random content’, and i imagine it would be pretty hard to ‘design’ a ‘game’ that does, after all computer and computer programs (and games) are based on rule sets.
That is about a deep as i care to go into the issue now. As i said before all the details on the aspects of ‘random’ vs ‘procedural’ (even where they intertwine) is out there, but let’s not just pick on this one aspect to pan a game that has only just been announced.
You may well have had terrible game experiences in games that have used procedural methods in the past, you may hate wide open massive sandbox games (preferring scripted linear games). You may even hate that all the new cool kids are making ‘everything’ procedural these days, but it is simply a method to solve a problem that sometimes is awesome (Elite) and other times not so awesome (Daggerfall maybe? Albeit my favorite TES).
So please carry on the important talk about all that stuff while we wait for more info on this intriguing looking game (except the on-line aspect, please don’t have a ‘like’ system or ‘friends list’ or ‘twitterness’, etc).
Ok, I will wait for clarification on this because there would seem to be little point of bothering to generate random unique worlds only to shackle everyone with a carbon copy.
Ok, I will wait for clarification on this because there would seem to be little point of bothering to generate random unique worlds only to shackle everyone with a carbon copy.
The point is so you can create a massive, diverse universe with one artist.
Notice the phrase “If you choose to” near the beginning. I wonder if they will make it so you, as the player, can also choose not to receive info from others. Would be nice not to have a galaxy full of planets named Phallus69.
