Procedural Generation

[Agarrett]

I heard on IRC that Loftar dislikes Procedural Generation for its dull personality. The only reason it is that way, is that you just took a square of land and pressed the button and everything appeared randomly. What you need to do is make a base map with land masses, oceans, and rivers you wish to add. Then hit the button and have details such as trees, rocks, and weeds appear. Plus make rivers much less common then they are right now.

[loftar]

I think you must misunderstood. The current maps are procedurally generated; I would never even have considered making maps manually.

What I have been talking about is just how maps should be generated, and I have pronounced an opposition to a purely fractally generated landscape, for reasons some of which are explained here.

[Raephire]

I think you must misunderstood. The current maps are procedurally generated; I would never even have considered making maps manually.

What I have been talking about is just how maps should be generated, and I have pronounced an opposition to a purely fractally generated landscape, for reasons some of which are explained here.

We just want seas and oceans and rivers that obey the laws of physics somewhat, having a beginning and an end.

[Agarrett]

I think you must misunderstood. The current maps are procedurally generated; I would never even have considered making maps manually.

What I have been talking about is just how maps should be generated, and I have pronounced an opposition to a purely fractally generated landscape, for reasons some of which are explained here.

It seems I have. Then when will this new generator be in existence? And since you are actually reading this post, when do you think the reset will be?

[Fluffy]

I think you must misunderstood. The current maps are procedurally generated; I would never even have considered making maps manually.

What I have been talking about is just how maps should be generated, and I have pronounced an opposition to a purely fractally generated landscape, for reasons some of which are explained here.

We just want seas and oceans and rivers that obey the laws of physics somewhat, having a beginning and an end.

And less "Schlong" lakes

[Agarrett]

and an ocean, and flying hippos and pretty rainbows.

[sabinati]

I think you must misunderstood. The current maps are procedurally generated; I would never even have considered making maps manually.

What I have been talking about is just how maps should be generated, and I have pronounced an opposition to a purely fractally generated landscape, for reasons some of which are explained here.

We just want seas and oceans and rivers that obey the laws of physics somewhat, having a beginning and an end.

And less "Schlong" lakes

no no no no no no no

[Agarrett]

[loftar]

It seems I have. Then when will this new generator be in existence? And since you are actually reading this post, when do you think the reset will be?

For now, we have hardly even begun thinking about it yet. There are many other things we want to do before a map reset even becomes relevant (because we have to relate the features of a new map to some of the things that are being planned). I also have lots to think about in relation to generating meaningful map features procedurally, so, well, yeah, I wouldn't be expecting it in a couple of months, at least.

It should be said that the climate zones discussed here and further elaborated upon tonight by Jorb and me have fuelled in us a renewed interest in a map reset, so we'll be working towards that point. Again, there's a lot of other things that need to be done first, though.

Oh, and of course any new map generator must be full of Loch Schlongs. It wouldn't be Haven without them. Oh, the gall to even suggest the idea of removing them!

[Agarrett]

So we are going to have more clothing options? Finally!