Return to “General”

Post

Re: The November 2014 Devlog Discussion Thread

#737
Sevron wrote:
blacktea wrote:I would say it this way. If Josh released his game right now, i would be very happy and satisfied already, and pay much money for it, as his game has more than the market can offer right now (because of LTSL in my opinion). But i want to see Josh, at least try, to give this game the diversity it deserves :)
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

The game is completely unplayable ATM, you just seem to be trying to look like a bigger fanboy than everybody else with these kinds of comments which makes no sense whatsoever.
You're not making a very good impression with your first posts, my friend.
Post

Re: The November 2014 Devlog Discussion Thread

#738
Hey Josh, if you really wanna blow your mind, consider this, what if what we perceive as reality, is really a sophisticated VR world. Everything that we know, we know through our various senses, which are nothing more than electrical impulses interpreted by our brains. We "think" we feel something because those tactile impulses are interpreted by our brains as, "you are holding something."

Think about it. :think:
Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.
Post

Re: The November 2014 Devlog Discussion Thread

#739
Shuul wrote:
Hyperion wrote:
One thing that greatly concerns me is that still too much attention has been given to Combat and Combat-related gameplay. You have been working to make sure that combat is a vibrant, exciting, fully developed arm of gameplay that never gets old regardless of whether you are a single fighter or an admiral, and that is fantastic. However, in my opinion.......
Umm, am I missing something? As for me combat is one of the most important feature, and I really haven't seen literally anything regarding hardpoint managing, subsystem and hull damage model, different armor\shields variants, stealth mechanic, weapon differences and damage types, weapon balancing etc. I know that this will be finished a bit later, after UI etc will be implemented, but its a must for that game :)
Heh each to his own I guess - I couldn't care less about combat :) All I want to do is take my little science vessel with stealth capability and venture out exploring and finding old relics from hyper advanced civilizations and trade in their technology - perhaps salvage an ancient ship and once I've rediscovered their language I'll scuttle my science ship and use its parts to fix up the ancient vessel - being able to find, extract and rediscover forgotten technologies and civilizations is what makes me excited about LT.

Combat is one of those that I understand why it needs to be in the game, but for me it's not important at all :)
procedurally generated comment
Post

Re: The November 2014 Devlog Discussion Thread

#740
Poet1960 wrote:Hey Josh, if you really wanna blow your mind, consider this, what if what we perceive as reality, is really a sophisticated VR world. Everything that we know, we know through our various senses, which are nothing more than electrical impulses interpreted by our brains. We "think" we feel something because those tactile impulses are interpreted by our brains as, "you are holding something."

Think about it. :think:
13th floor

Matrix

Etc.
procedurally generated comment
Post

Re: The November 2014 Devlog Discussion Thread

#742
BFett wrote:The video in the dev log was good up until the 13 minute mark where the guy said that the computer generates heat because the user deletes stuff from it. Not true, If I wipe the hard drive and just leave the computer idle in that state it's still going to generate heat.
His point wasn't that it's the only reason your computer generates heat. Clearly this is not the main cause of heat -- but the point being that the information that you 'deleted' still exists in the environment, that you didn't actually 'destroy' information. Also, he's not a computer guy :P Probably for the best that most of his metaphors involve fish :lol:
“Whether you think you can, or you think you can't--you're right.” ~ Henry Ford
Post

Re: The November 2014 Devlog Discussion Thread

#744
The act of observation, creates some interesting peculiarities. What is it about the act of observation, that can change how an object operates. Or at least appears to change. You have to assume there is no real change in the object itself, so what is actually changing? It seems to me that one is an observance of the effect an object has on it's surroundings, and the other is a direct observation of the thing itself. Generally this seems to happen on the very small scale level, like quantum mechanics and particles. I wonder if the variance is caused by different time frame references between what is observed and who is doing the observing.
Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.
Post

Re: The November 2014 Devlog Discussion Thread

#745
Miklos wrote: All I want to do is take my little science vessel with stealth capability and venture out exploring and finding old relics from hyper advanced civilizations and trade in their technology - perhaps salvage an ancient ship and once I've rediscovered their language I'll scuttle my science ship and use its parts to fix up the ancient vessel - being able to find, extract and rediscover forgotten technologies and civilizations is what makes me excited about LT.

Combat is one of those that I understand why it needs to be in the game, but for me it's not important at all :)
Totaly agree, in fact, this is exactly the first thing, i wanted to mod in, after i will have access to the game. So we will have our fun, regardless, how it all plays out in the end ;)
Post

Re: The November 2014 Devlog Discussion Thread

#746
aspman wrote:I think Hyperion would agree, he does want more than the boundaries of the KS and LT1, and it was more for his gameplay that I meant about the modding ongoing (mega factory manager mod v1 etc.) although the better Josh can make this initially, then all the better, but not at expense of lacking features elsewhere.
Hyperion's comments were quite detailed, verging on being a set of use cases for LT (which seems to me would be a pretty handy thing to have). I agree that, individually, each specific example probably was somewhere around the edge of the envelope.

But taking his comments as a whole, and seeing how they describe a general goal of achieving a balance of entertainment modes in LT, I think he was right on the money. That's the overall "feel" I'm hoping for as well.
blacktea wrote:shame on me... :D Well sry if i offended somebody, my english is not very well, and i alwys write what i think in the moment....
Just commenting as another forum member, I would say "don't worry about it."

Sevron is obviously new here and has posted before realizing how this place actually works.
JoshParnell wrote:the point being that the information that you 'deleted' still exists in the environment, that you didn't actually 'destroy' information.
The older I get, the more I think that it's impossible to understand the nature of the universe in even a fractional way without understanding the work of Claude Shannon: it's all information.

Achieving order-of-magnitude compression would seem not to be a lossless algorithm -- at that point you've probably gone well past the 50% mark (from the Nyquist sampling limit) and will start to see aliasing in the remaining data.

So the question really is, is it possible to write an algorithm good enough to reconstruct an accurate copy of the original information?

I don't know this, but if I had to guess I would guess that there is some natural (thermodynamic?) law that says nope, not possible. I'd bet that the value of the effort required to create such an algorithm would exceed the value of the original information.

Next best: a reasonable approximation of the original information. Assuming we could agree on what constitutes a "reasonable" approximation, would it be possible to write an algorithm that is capable of reconstituting a version of the original information that seems good enough?

Mmmmmmmmaybe. :) I also wonder if, assuming such an algorithm were used, any detectable artifacts of the previous compression would remain. I suspect not, since you're basically recreating reality -- who's to say that hasn't already been done many times before, and every time is just a fresh use of the generative algorithm?

Also, why is this starting to feel like the scene in Animal House where they've gone to the professor's place?
Post

Re: The November 2014 Devlog Discussion Thread

#747
I have another interesting question for you, what would be the purpose of life, if you see a living Cell as a computer, and DNA as an algorythm, which is running for billions of years. It didnt change very much. But it did. So why, and what is it trying to achive :) And why there is some place in the universe of entrophy, where despite the rest of the universe, the data stored in matter is getting more complex over time...
Post

Re: The November 2014 Devlog Discussion Thread

#748
blacktea wrote:I have another interesting question for you, what would be the purpose of life, if you see a living Cell as a computer, and DNA as an algorythm, which is running for billions of years. It didnt change very much. But it did. So why, and what is it trying to achive :) And why there is some place in the universe of entrophy, where despite the rest of the universe, the data stored in matter is getting more complex over time...
Oooooh, hot damn, isn't the world interesting? Thanks, Science!

As someone still undertaking a bachelor's I only have a limited understanding, so please feel free to go "pfft."

I'm not 100% sure your metaphor holds fast. For instance, DNA defines the structure of the cell and its workings - and any attributed purpose of life at a cellular level would be conjecture at best.

That being said! Life is funky, and I can't get over the vast coincidence that we just happened to come to existence. I mean, think of the barriers! But I wouldn't say that there would be a purpose; doing so would infer that there is some "fate," or higher-level being that has set forth the motions of the universe for some dramatic purpose. Rather, I subscribe to thinking that we're all just a cosmic fart that somehow came out smelling of roses and humanity.

Arriving at eukaryotic cells with complex DNA was quite a feat, but the fact that we've arrived here, right now, as one of many species from different paths, is simply astounding. But in the end, it is the product of reproducing molecules and chance. Mutation and change is the means, and there might not be an ends. Though, fun fact, evolution might not be the same in humans as it is in other animals and plants! Thanks to health care and general non-dyingness in the Western Hemisphere, nature doesn't exert an environmental pressure to facilitate natural selection (though this may go away soon, as global warming/population density-related disease come after us more). Instead, evolution is being geared more and more towards self-induced pressures.

As for entropy, the funky formations of modern-day matter at all scales is the result of slight irregularities in the Big Bang's aftermath. (How that came about, no sweet clue. :D ) These irregularities and densities have given rise to interactions that have resulted in order, with the elements, molecules, substances, significant others, Eiffel Towers, planets, solar systems, galaxies, galaxy clusters, superclusters, and filaments that we all see today. And we have evidence!

But don't worry though. Complex matter will eventually make its way out somehow, on our way to the end of reality as we know it.

Fun, right?! Now s'cuse me, gotta biopsychology report to finish... :problem:
Post

Re: The November 2014 Devlog Discussion Thread

#749
'm not 100% sure your metaphor holds fast. For instance, DNA defines the structure of the cell and its workings - and any attributed purpose of life at a cellular level would be conjecture at best.
Well DNA not only defines the structure of the cell, but also its behavior. It is an algorythm stored in the way, which proteins can read an execute :)
As for entropy, the funky formations of modern-day matter at all scales is the result of slight irregularities in the Big Bang's aftermath. (How that came about, no sweet clue. :D ) These irregularities and densities have given rise to interactions that have resulted in order, with the elements, molecules, substances, significant others, Eiffel Towers, planets, solar systems, galaxies, galaxy clusters, superclusters, and filaments that we all see today. And we have evidence!
In fact everyting in the universe is falling apart, stars burning out of fuel, decay of radioactive matter, the entropy law.. ad so on. But we, living things always trying to resist this laws :) Every our action is making the universe more komplex, against its endeavor.
Oooooh, hot damn, isn't the world interesting? Thanks, Science!
Isn't it ? :D
Post

Re: The November 2014 Devlog Discussion Thread

#750
blacktea wrote:I have another interesting question for you, what would be the purpose of life, if you see a living Cell as a computer, and DNA as an algorythm, which is running for billions of years. It didnt change very much. But it did. So why, and what is it trying to achive :) And why there is some place in the universe of entrophy, where despite the rest of the universe, the data stored in matter is getting more complex over time...
Obviously DNA is a tachyonic sensor and transmitter, designed to warn if the Others ever invade from outside our galaxy. Its secondary capability of robust self-replication was designed to ensure the stability and longevity of the sensor network.

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest

cron