[project1dev] Re: procedural generation

  • From: Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 13:10:00 -0700

Glad you like it!

I'll wait to see if anyone else has any input about it but if we dont see a
reason that this wouldn't work, i think we should plan on making this

Hopefully i'll be able to convince shadows to help us, the extra pair of
hands on this stuff would really be nice.
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 1:06 PM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> alan... don't post stuff like this while i am at work, I will be severely
> embarrased if someone sees me celebrating and weeping w/ joy at this awesome
> idea
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 3:56 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> ok so... that game LOVE that i posted a link about has some really neat
>> ideas especially about the problem we will have of not being able to supply
>> art fast enough to keep up w/ content creation.
>> Thats what i think anyhow, it just seems like the process of building is
>> going to take a lot less tiem than the process of prettying up since
>> prettying is more involved (although adding enemies and scripted events may
>> make the process more on an even playing field).
>> Anyhow, i thought we could maybe brainstorm about the possibility of
>> making our game procedurally generated.
>> If we do figure out something, we dont have to do it right away, i think
>> it'd make most sense if we still built things by hand for a while so we
>> could still keep making progress instead of just being stopped dead in our
>> tracks (:
>> Here's a scenario i was picturing, one of the many avenues we could
>> possibly go down to make this work.
>> 1) A builder goes through and makes a basic skeleton map like kent did
>> with the cave level
>> 2) As the map is being built, the model used for the floor peice basically
>> defines what kind of art it will use
>> So for instance if you placed down a 4x1 tile model that was
>> "CaveFloor_4x1.ms3d", when you placed it down, it would just be a flat 4x1
>> tile that had a dirt texture on it.  Not pretty lookin, but it makes sense
>> when you look at it what it is.
>> 3) When the map loads, it fills in the details
>> When the game loads the map, it looks at that cave floor model and it
>> knows a few things about cave...
>> a) cave floors aren't level... they have bumps in them
>> b) cave floors that border on nothingness have walls to keep players from
>> falling into infinity
>> c) cave floors have small rocks on them
>> So, it would take that 4x1 cave floor and generate a model on they fly (or
>> maybe choose randomly from some existing cave floor models) and place it
>> there.  It will find out where the walls should be and automatically border
>> it in walls.  Lastly, it will populate the cave floor with small rocks.
>> And when i say randomly i'm talking pseudo random numbers.  Basically it
>> will be the same random numbers each time for a given map that define where
>> these things go, so every time you went into a specific cave it would be the
>> same cave.
>> 4) Artists can still hand-touch up the resulting generated map.
>> We'll really need an in game editor for this, but artists will be able to
>> take the fleshed out, generated map and hand tweak things by moving things
>> around, scaling them, rotating them, and adding new models in there (ie
>> models specific to missions and thing like that).
>> Basically those hand tweaks will correspond to extra script commands to
>> run after the map has been "fleshed out" by the procedural generator.
>> Each environment will have it's own set of oddities we'll have to work
>> out... like a forest gets populated differently than a cave, and stuff like
>> that... so there are lots more details we'll have to figure out.  But, i
>> think a system like this coudl work.  It would take a lot of coding but I
>> think it's doable and i think it's worth it.
>> We would also need some base art for the procedural generator to work, but
>> that should be a lot less work than an artist having to pretty up each map
>> by hand i think.
>> What do you guys think?  Also, any things you would change about it?  Or
>> anyone have any better ideas?  Or disagree that this would be useful? (:

Other related posts: