Return to “Dev Logs”

Post

Re: [Lindsey] Friday, November 10, 2017

#32
Talvieno wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:36 pm
I don't think a node-based editor is likely at this point. While Josh is all about beauty, Adam is more about utility. Nodes are pretty, and they convey a broader picture well, but they're hard to use and don't convey the important details quickly. Just my thoughts, though.
i agree; arguably, the node interface is a leaky abstraction. I shouldn't have to walk an object tree myself -- the game should walk the tree for me and render something in a human-readable menu with a scroll bar and sorting tabs.
Shameless Self-Promotion 0/ magenta 0/ Forum Rules & Game FAQ
Post

Re: [Lindsey] Friday, November 10, 2017

#33
Aye, as much as I'd like a dynamic node based beautyfest of a UI, I want it to be pragmatic... but if you can be beautiful while also remaining pragmatic, all the better.
Image
When you're trying to fill an infinite multiverse, if you're not willing to consider the entire creative output of humanity as a starting point, you're wasting your time.
User: JoshParnell is accountable for this user's actions.
Post

Re: [Lindsey] Friday, November 10, 2017

#34
I consider that dynamic node editor a tech demo: pushing a concept to see how it feels in use.

Yes, obviously it has to be functional. :roll:

But there is also real value in delivering a product that delivers content in a visually distinctive way. That's part of what makes a game memorable, that enables water cooler moments, that makes a game instantly recognizable even from a static screenshot.

I loved the look and behavior of that node editor, and I think it could contribute to a unique look-and-feel for LT. But yes, of course it has to be usable as well.

Who can't see that possibility?
Post

Re: [Lindsey] Friday, November 10, 2017

#35
When it ships, give us the node code as a freebie, raw and uneditted. This was back at the point where everything was basically a plug-in right?

I want to study it and see how you actually made that work. With the explosion of data visualization these days, I could get a lot of mileage out of those haunting visuals. We can discuss royalties and licensing
Post

Re: [Lindsey] Friday, November 10, 2017

#37
Hey y'all! Thank you for being patient during our Thanksgiving vacations :3

Before we leave for our winter holidays this year (which will be around last week of Dec- first week of January- ish), we'll drop a note so that we don't just leave devlogs hanging.

We're all back in the office now, and I'll write another devlog this Friday. It's going to be very little to no code, and lots of doodles, since I'm working on concepting station parts right now. :D :D
Blog | Twitter | Pinterest

"You’ve got to work on something dangerous. You have to work on something that makes you uncertain. Something that makes you doubt yourself... because it stimulates you to do things you haven’t done before. The whole thing is if you know where you’re going, you’ve gone, as the poet says. And that’s death."
- Stephen Sondheim
Post

Re: [Lindsey] Friday, November 10, 2017

#39
Thanks for the update, can't wait to see it!

As for concepts on station parts, I'd thought about the idea of a "theme" code, where some particular shape or ratio or algorithm is selected at random and applied to an entire species or culture ID or alliance/faction. This wouldn't force their ships to be identical, but they would all share the same theme, which would hopefully make them instantly recognizable. But maybe there's a better way too.

I think it's a good idea to just get a fair variety of patterns and make sure they are reasonably coherent, because I suspect that models and station designs will be something that will be worked on and improved upon for a very long time. :thumbup:
Image
When you're trying to fill an infinite multiverse, if you're not willing to consider the entire creative output of humanity as a starting point, you're wasting your time.
User: JoshParnell is accountable for this user's actions.
Post

Re: [Lindsey] Friday, November 10, 2017

#42
thedamngod wrote:
Tue Nov 28, 2017 1:32 pm
Thanks for the update, Lindsey! It is very much appreciated :)
I can't wait for the next dev log :D
Glad to hear it ^^

Hyperion wrote:
Tue Nov 28, 2017 4:45 pm
As for concepts on station parts, I'd thought about the idea of a "theme" code, where some particular shape or ratio or algorithm is selected at random and applied to an entire species or culture ID or alliance/faction. This wouldn't force their ships to be identical, but they would all share the same theme, which would hopefully make them instantly recognizable. But maybe there's a better way too.
Faction styles have been in progress since before Thanksgiving! I'll probably write a little about them in the next devlog.

Matfink wrote:
Wed Nov 29, 2017 6:04 am
Good stuff Lindsey!

Been trying to procGen ships myself but just in 2d - that's hard enough! (though with playable interiors too).
I'm using Unity and Archimatix, which is great for playing around and seeing how things can be combined for sometimes unexpected results.

Good luck,
M
I just showed this to the office. To quote Cornflakes, we all felt it was "cool shit" :-0


Also, for those of you who don't use or follow me on Twitter, here's a funky-looking in-progress screenshot from yesterday. :)
Spoiler:      SHOW
Image
Blog | Twitter | Pinterest

"You’ve got to work on something dangerous. You have to work on something that makes you uncertain. Something that makes you doubt yourself... because it stimulates you to do things you haven’t done before. The whole thing is if you know where you’re going, you’ve gone, as the poet says. And that’s death."
- Stephen Sondheim
Post

Re: [Lindsey] Friday, November 10, 2017

#44
N810 wrote:
Wed Nov 29, 2017 12:17 pm
Woah, did you extrude the face with a vector mask of some type ? :eh:
Nope, I actually just used a sloppy tessellation algorithm to break down all the tris into smaller tris, then extruded those tris & contracted the extruded faces. I was in the middle of writing & testing a greebling algorithm.

A vector mask would have been much more complicated. Why do that when you could just have happy accidents? :p
Blog | Twitter | Pinterest

"You’ve got to work on something dangerous. You have to work on something that makes you uncertain. Something that makes you doubt yourself... because it stimulates you to do things you haven’t done before. The whole thing is if you know where you’re going, you’ve gone, as the poet says. And that’s death."
- Stephen Sondheim

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: Cornflakes_91 and 5 guests

cron