Gaming Steve Message Board

Will Wright's Spore => Spore: General => Topic started by: Efreet on March 23, 2005, 02:44:47 pm

Title: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Efreet on March 23, 2005, 02:44:47 pm
What if I want my creature to perform Mitosis? Or I rather have give birth to live babies instead of eggs?


Can I do so, or will I only be able to lay eggs? Laying eggs is primitive and it makes the race more vunerable.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Jecrell on March 23, 2005, 02:57:38 pm
The programming the game holds should be able to handle coming up with alternate methods to producing offspring.

I see absolutely no reason why you wouldn't be able to do it.
However, this is merely "my perspective."

Can you really trust the opinion of the Noob Monkey? :)
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: craigp on March 23, 2005, 03:04:56 pm
It would open a can of worms to use anything but eggs. I'll bet that all creatures reproduce by eggs.

-Craig
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: happydan20 on March 23, 2005, 03:07:24 pm
I think the egg is symbolic, more like a "hey you did it! You evolved! LEVEL UP" thing.  I think people are going overboard with the what ifs.  But thats only my opinion.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Efreet on March 23, 2005, 03:07:47 pm
And how does the species mate to create diversion? If they dont mate to generate new DNA combinations how can they evolve at all, they would be just cloning themselves.


And does all creatures have DNA? Are there other ways of building a lifeform then DNA and RNA?

What about shells? Can I add scales to my specie?
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Jecrell on March 23, 2005, 03:14:07 pm
Technically -- the whole evolution thing occurs -- to my knowledge -- up to the point of sentience and the village. From there, the evolution game stops, and the "conquer the universe" phase begins.

However, I'm sure we can start from the beggining.

I think there are scales from the creature screenshot, but I have no idea about shells.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Huasat on March 23, 2005, 03:22:59 pm
Quote
And how does the species mate to create diversion? If they dont mate to generate new DNA combinations how can they evolve at all, they would be just cloning themselves.

could be in the same way some bacteria and other single celled organisms do it: individuals exchange genetic material periodically, but not as part of the reproductive process.
Might be a bit icky in multi-cellular organisms though :P

But seriously, that's just speculation, highly unlikely anything like that'll be in Spore. My own personal thing i'd like to see in Spore is eusocial reproduction, like ants/termites/naked mole rats etc. But yeh, highly unlikely :-\ I think i'll have to go with the "eggs only" thing. Much simpler.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: craigp on March 23, 2005, 04:16:28 pm
Scales are definite - his creature had scales. I'm pretty sure I saw some shells, or shell-like things, in the powerpoint display.

I'm pretty sure that we are the only way creatures change, using the editor. They don't change on their own through interbreeding or inbreeding. Our species don't need to interbreed with other speciies to advance, since we advance them every generation on our own.

Although I kind of like the idea of a 'Don Juan' aspect to the game... 'you must breed with every species on the planet!' ;)

-Craig
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Efreet on March 23, 2005, 05:18:31 pm
So, say I make a turtle. When my race gains sentience, they will still have turtles?



hmm... They could have retractable limbs that comes out of holes in the scale.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: kushinagi on March 23, 2005, 05:56:29 pm
If you're not happy with what you have, just don't put points into brain power. Keep building with it till you're happy. The game is DEFINATELY not gonna say "You've evolved long enough, NOW GET TA THINKING!"
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Scipion on March 23, 2005, 06:14:57 pm
Yeah, real species don't all lay eggs, but it's just the simplest way to do things in a game. Mammals are just too messy and graphic. You only gain sentience once you've gotten your brian power to a certian point.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: kushinagi on March 23, 2005, 06:18:14 pm
Also, mammals have mammory glands. How do you tell the game your creature has mammory glands? And why would we want to see your creature's mammory glands?
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Tarious on March 23, 2005, 06:31:53 pm
Well you can't have mammals if they leg eggs.

But the platapus lays eggs and its a mammal.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Efreet on March 23, 2005, 07:35:05 pm
but the platapus also has a beak and the tail of a beaver.

hmm..

the platapus is a Spore kind of creature:P
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: kushinagi on March 23, 2005, 07:37:00 pm
It was a winner of a future contest. Will Wright went back and time and made it real as a reward.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Tarious on March 23, 2005, 07:41:18 pm
Well if a creature could divide like cells then the species would be able to overpopulate the world in no time. It's be to powerful.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: krjal on March 23, 2005, 07:59:55 pm
@ kushinagi: Who's was it!!?? ;D
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: kushinagi on March 23, 2005, 08:02:17 pm
50 Cents
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: krjal on March 23, 2005, 08:24:15 pm
*krjal suffers from massive brain trauma, dies, and promptly recovers*
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: kushinagi on March 23, 2005, 08:26:22 pm
That's what happens when you meddle witht the future
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: s0lidmetal on March 24, 2005, 06:00:28 pm
i think you guys are turning an incredible simple game into something more advanced than it really is.  it isn't really healthy to overhyp a game this much but we can still dream.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Tarious on March 24, 2005, 06:25:52 pm
nothing says it won't be in the game. We don't know much about the game yet.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: kushinagi on March 24, 2005, 07:05:52 pm
That may be true, Tarious, but remember Fable. We mustn't forget the letdown that was Fable. A lot of people just hated the game because they were built up so much by places like this, and forgot that it's a good game anyway. Just keep in mind over half of what we suggest feasable won't be in it. And don't get your hope too far up.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: krjal on March 24, 2005, 08:24:59 pm
We're going to need a stickie telling people to play the game and enjoy it for what it is, not what the everything syndrome dictates it should be.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: happydan20 on March 24, 2005, 10:13:56 pm
I see what your saying about telling people not to overhype themselves.  That was the specific issue that spawned the everything syndrome... (which by the way you owe me royalties for invoking it's name :D)

But I think it's something most people learn after they follow a game from the ground up... I mean the first time, you expect that game to clean your house when it's not in use!  But games after that you realize deep breathes of reality are necessary.  I think people have to figure that out for themselves.  Unless this game is a pr nightmare info will be relased about it every now and then... so we should have some facts to throw around.

At this point we are just swimming through the soup looking for things to eat :o

Maybe steve should address this in a podcast,  he could probibly give his opinions about the scope and focus of the game and sound credible.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Scipion on March 26, 2005, 05:19:53 pm
Being left in the dark sucks, but it's just a natural part of a game's development. We're lucky to ahve the info we do. A game like this probably should have had a very small video displaying what it did, but not with Will Wright making it!
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: SHW on March 26, 2005, 05:20:39 pm
Has Will Wright made a game that isn't a hit?
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: craigp on March 28, 2005, 08:01:24 am
Has Will Wright made a game that isn't a hit?
Yes.

-Craig
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: SHW on March 28, 2005, 08:05:28 am
...and that would be? ???
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: craigp on March 28, 2005, 08:26:15 am
We can start with Sim Earth. There are others.

-Craig
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: SHW on March 28, 2005, 09:46:30 am
What about speies that actually grow their children through budding?
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Tarious on March 28, 2005, 09:48:24 am
When they have an x-pack, I bet that alternate ways for a creature to be born besides the egg will be in it.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: SHW on March 28, 2005, 05:11:07 pm
If this game becomes popular enough, maybe the community can mod it.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Tarious on March 28, 2005, 05:26:58 pm
Well we'll also need to know the mod capabilities. I've played a game where we just figured out how to mod it after 3 1/2 years its been out.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: SHW on March 28, 2005, 05:31:46 pm
Sim City 4 was very easily modded, TS2 has such a large community that it was modded. Spore should be easily modded.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: krjal on March 28, 2005, 07:33:16 pm
Not having played Sim City 4 I can't really say based on that but Spore will probably have even more accessable modding characteristics due to the maths based engine.

@ Tarious: What game was that?
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Tarious on March 28, 2005, 07:36:01 pm
I keep forgeting that this is being made by the same guy at the Sim series cause usally everything has Sim in it.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: SHW on March 29, 2005, 11:53:55 am
Yeah, except Maxis also made the 3D pinball that came with Windows.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Myshuno on June 19, 2006, 07:22:13 pm
yay
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: stuck on June 19, 2006, 08:20:34 pm
Do not necrobump with one word replies, especially ones that are utterly pointless and irrelevant. Where's that GTFO pic?
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: slugfly on June 19, 2006, 08:54:20 pm
having all creatures lay eggs is restricting and lacking in imagination.  Eggs have the advantage of lay em and leave em, they require much less attention and energy and are reasonably self sufficient after hatching.  Giving birth live has the disadvantage of requiring greater resources, but it has the advantage of producing stronger and more physically developed offspring, however in a weird twist of irony and contradiction, the live young require (usually) some taking care of afterwards.

eggs = much much lower energy concerns
live = greater long term strength and more social advantages
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: HolsteinCow on June 19, 2006, 09:09:31 pm
1) The eggs are symbolic. You could see it as a 'nest' for your mammal babies(or if maxis decides to include that somehow it could be cool too)
2) Nobody wants to see a walking penis giving mammalian birth to another penis. No matter how much you can argue in favor of it, it's still just wrong.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: 762 on June 19, 2006, 09:13:51 pm
What do you people think this game is going to be?

(http://www.gamepro.com/screens/110626/55188-26-2.jpg)

It's going to be a game filled with creatures that look like that. Nobody at Maxis is concerned with hyper-realism. So my creature has eggs, even though it looks like a mammal. I don't care one bit.

Please, stop reading so much into this game and wondering whether there will be live birth or a blood viscosity editor or something equally unimportant. It's just not going to happen.

Sorry if I sounded like a troll, I didn't mean to. I just get frustrated when I come to these forums and see them filled with frivolous concerns.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Clayface on June 20, 2006, 01:24:35 am
sorry I didnt read all the posts, but all species have eggs(i thinks, i dont know about asexual), and all species have Mitosis.

for a creature of any stature to not have eirther of those things would be unrealistic.

true not all things lay eggs, but im sure live birth will be included in the game
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: slugfly on June 20, 2006, 04:29:09 am
What do you people think this game is going to be?

(http://www.gamepro.com/screens/110626/55188-26-2.jpg)

It's going to be a game filled with creatures that look like that.

not mine... and not yours if you're connected to the internet...  Sure lots of them will be cartoony and 'unrealistic' but that doesn't mean that the potential to make smooth and cool looking creatures isn't there.  Remember Will's Carebear?  That was cartoony and cute but it was also an excellent example of the detail we can have for shape.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on June 20, 2006, 04:47:32 am
I have to agree with some of you, that too much realism will stop this from being as fun as it could be, but that doesnt mean 'live birth' couldnt be done. When you think about it, laying eggs isnt exactly a clean child-safe way of ejecting the young lifeforms from a parental body, if you've ever seen certain species laying them, with the little extra gushy discharge that goes with. Thing is, maxis has been very good at including subjects that have a more adult lean, without making them pointlessly graphic, and even pulls it off with style and a bit of humor. Rather than seeing a close-up view of the reproductive orifice as the egg squelches forth, the egg carrying creature stands over the nesting site and squats, bit of dust, eggs appear. Simple, easy, clean. Live-birth could be done in a similar style, but the main concerns is that the eggs were the symbol of the next generation, and that once kept healthy for long enough, they provided a clear click-point to advance to the next generation. Eggs are a food source to others, and they are stationary, and they are hard to lose track of. Sounds like the perfect choice for the middle-point between generations. Live births are troublesome because they would be small, perhaps slightly mobile, and from a little distance the nest might appear empty and give players heart-attacks when they think something snatched them away.

Basically, its very possible, and it doesnt need to be gorey. Realism vs functionality. Variety vs simplicity. In the end, i'd love to see it, but its down to what the guys at maxis can work in. Not every idea has to be implemented in a complex way, just remember that. We're already talking about a game where we go from blobule to interstellar mini-gods.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Didero on June 20, 2006, 05:01:52 am
With live-birth, you'd have to get some sort of prompt right before birth saying 'You are now going to the creature editor'. With eggs, you can click on them whenever you have time (when you're done eating, or done playing with the zebrasaurs), to go to the Creature Editor, so it keeps you in the game, unlike that prompt, that disturbs gameplay.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: slugfly on June 20, 2006, 06:40:46 am
very good point, but there must be a work around.  Remember that except for herding animals most live births are pretty vulnerable for at least the first few weeks... maybe they could have a very light colored version of the creature that just stays crawling about the nest for a while (the same duration it would take the eggs to hatch) and you can click on that...

From this perspective it would merely be a matter of changing out the egg model with minimal animation and miscolored version of your creature.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on June 20, 2006, 07:38:29 am
So its basically just an alternate to eggs. Same effect, just different outwards appearance? Instead of a clutch of eggs, we have a bed of little baby critters laying around in the nest, then perhaps when they are ready to let you advance to the next gen and let you into the editor, they get up and start plodding around the little nest site, looking around helplessly? :3
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: slugfly on June 20, 2006, 07:53:21 am
I think however that there should be stat modifications for choosing egg or live young.  Very basic and relatively unimportant, but something to make it not superficial.

Since we can be pretty sure that no species will carry young (put on some Barry Manilow and *poof* you got babies), we can be sure that expended energy won't come into play... so, how about this?

egg=get more young per clutch, also closer to adult development at birth (stronger and less time till adulthood)
live=less young per litter but greater social gains, also maybe requires less food during infancy (or refill food bar simply by approaching an adult, ie. mammaries)
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on June 20, 2006, 08:03:08 am
Heh, I can imagine the infants gathering around an adult, and the adult "sitting" on them, and the young siphoning 'food' from the adult. Actually, whilst we're at this, I wonder if it would be possible to harvest food for other creatures in your pack, and whether a creature with low health would be slower, move differently (in a sick/injured way), and need to seek protection? I could see adults crippling creatures then letting the children finish it off, teaching them how to hunt, or full grown creatures first crippling creatures then starting to eat them alive (higher food yield). It would all add variety and depth (each game being a lot more different to the others), but still amounts to a lot of finicky adjustments. Any extras they add, i'll be glad of, but I wont sob too loudly if these such things arent added.

My mind is focused upon variety, I would like to be wowwed even on my 4th time playing through the creature stage, thinking "I never saw anything like that behaviour in my other 3 creatures". Soon, this game will become reality. Not -a- reality, but just reality. The edges of your monitor will vanish, and your house will be sucked in through a black hole. Whee. To quote Futurama :
"Dont you know the difference between reality and TV?"
"Yeah, TV is higher resolution!"
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: slugfly on June 20, 2006, 08:28:59 am
although I'm mostly scared, I have a large seed of confidence...

What we want and what we know (mixed together) and what we know about Maxis

RTS elements (a first for Maxis... as far as I know they've never made a combative game)
Exploration (Wright has a huge fascination with space, I think we can be confident on this one)
Civs, cities and buildings (Maxis made loads of Simcity games, I think that the 'simcity' part of the game will be complex and simple according to the user's desire)
Behavior (Maxis made about 3 games (I think) with a collective total of about 8 or 9 expansions based almost ENTIRELY on AI behavior...  As much as we might be worried about it, I think we can have a measure of confidence)
Evolution and change (Sims 2 had an evolution feature)
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: LoneWolf on June 20, 2006, 01:27:24 pm
Guys you can evolve past tribal stage
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: stuck on June 20, 2006, 02:01:46 pm
Guys you can evolve past tribal stage

Surely you don't mean physically. It's been said countless times before, no evolution (in the Darwinian sense) past tribal stage. Other than that, you do evolve socially, culturally, scientifically.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Jameso on June 22, 2006, 11:23:54 pm
Well you can't have mammals if they leg eggs.

But the platapus lays eggs and its a mammal.

  >:( GAAAAAHHH! The Platypus is a Monotreme (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotreme), not quite a mammal. An egg-laying, milk-feeder.


Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Clayface on June 23, 2006, 12:46:44 am
a Monotreme is a Mammal

a Platypus is a
Animalia Chordata Mammalia Monotremata    Ornithorhynchidae Ornithorhynchus anatinus
full scientific name
as you can see
its class is Mammalia, meaning Mammal,
you are right, it IS a Monotreme, but that is its order, not its class
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: derella on June 23, 2006, 04:16:28 am
It's going to be a game filled with creatures that look like that. Nobody at Maxis is concerned with hyper-realism. So my creature has eggs, even though it looks like a mammal. I don't care one bit.

Please, stop reading so much into this game and wondering whether there will be live birth or a blood viscosity editor or something equally unimportant. It's just not going to happen.

Sorry if I sounded like a troll, I didn't mean to. I just get frustrated when I come to these forums and see them filled with frivolous concerns.
I have to agree. The level of detail some people are expecting is just going to lead to them being disappointed when they finally get to play the game.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on June 23, 2006, 06:06:58 am
I have to agree. The level of detail some people are expecting is just going to lead to them being disappointed when they finally get to play the game.
Not all of us expect it though, these are "What if?"s and "Wouldnt it be nice?"s.
We only get disappointed when we delude ourselves into somehow believing that these things are going in. We'll take what we are given, but the more we get the better. As for the blood viscousity and other little things, to some people, they arent just little trivial things, they're toys. Saying "its just not going to happen" is something I bet was said a lot, to other people who said "Wouldnt it be a nice if there was a game where you could design life, and evolve them upwards until they go into space?".

We'll wait and see. Im personally just hoping for as many little tweaks and toys as they can manage to stuff in.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Myshuno on June 23, 2006, 08:40:57 am
did me saying "yay" on the oldest thread really start up this much commotion.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: mccarty181 on June 23, 2006, 09:32:29 am
did me saying "yay" on the oldest thread really start up this much commotion.

yes, yes it did good job ;D
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on June 23, 2006, 09:49:57 am
I only just noticed, CraigP, your avatar is a ship from "SC2 : Ur-Quan Masters", right? :3
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Brutus on June 23, 2006, 01:03:36 pm
is not this thread one of first spore threads ever made? why is it still here?
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: The Terminator on June 23, 2006, 01:04:45 pm
Here's my idea: Instead of clicking on the eggs to go in creature editing, you click on the female creatures fat belly.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Clayface on June 23, 2006, 01:06:18 pm
is not this thread one of first spore threads ever made? why is it still here?

no, no its not, its off by a few days.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Myshuno on June 23, 2006, 02:22:15 pm
is not this thread one of first spore threads ever made? why is it still here?

because i said yay
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on June 23, 2006, 03:24:42 pm
Here's my idea: Instead of clicking on the eggs to go in creature editing, you click on the female creatures fat belly.
That could work too, having to defend the chosen female. If movement complicates things too much, she could just sit down and rest whilst they gestate. Essentially being the same thing, just a different visual. Of course, how will it work out where the children are stored in the creature? It would be funny for their heads to inflate crazily during pregnancy   xP
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Jarax on June 24, 2006, 01:10:09 am
If in the game you'll be restricted only to laying eggs then many possible speacies will be unable to create or will be too unrealistic. For example those horse-like creatures in one of the films, they were obviusly created to be fast runners but instead of running when attacked they fight opponent couse they had to protect their egg. So simply you can't make a pack of  creatures that would be still moving and escaping from the predators.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Protoavis on June 24, 2006, 02:38:18 am
If in the game you'll be restricted only to laying eggs then many possible speacies will be unable to create or will be too unrealistic.

You have seen the graphics style used in the game right? And you're concerned about realisation on the eggs point....ok then.

Beyond that, i'd bet its always be the weak predator in the ecosystem that attacks your nest. The weaker your creature is, the weaker the lowest predator is.

Seriously I think it's trival thing, the creature stage is a small part of a larger game. You'll be in it a couple hours before moving on to tribal where the whole issue is non existent.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on June 24, 2006, 04:39:34 am
Although having the weaker, scavenging creatures attack your nest sounds about right.. he/she does have a point. Some creatures only real defense mechanism is to run hard and fast. A non-combat oriented creature who relies on speed to survive couldnt defend its own nest very well, whereas carrying the child would allow them the chance to survive. I'd like to see that implemented, rather than always having the attackers be weaker and weaker, as that would just get a tad too predictable.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: ChristianSkunk on June 25, 2006, 03:48:11 pm
If in the game you'll be restricted only to laying eggs then many possible speacies will be unable to create or will be too unrealistic. For example those horse-like creatures in one of the films, they were obviusly created to be fast runners but instead of running when attacked they fight opponent couse they had to protect their egg. So simply you can't make a pack of  creatures that would be still moving and escaping from the predators.

Well, I don't think we know enough about the game from what we've seen.  I've only seen the GDC and E3 demo videos.  In the E3, we see three other species eggs.  The first was a little guy by himself, but he still seemed threatening and stayed to defend the egg.  The second was a small species, but there were many of them and highly social, so they were willing to try and fight Will off (assuming he was playing it, and it wasn't just a pre-generated video...).  The other was the herd of herbivores.  They didn't notice Will at first, but one was coming at him after he'd already cracked the egg.  The others didn't notice or didn't care...  I believe it's possible that how a species responds will depend on its personality and structure.  In nature, some creatures will try to distract the predator/scavenger without actually attacking it.  In some cases, the parent will sacrifice the young so it may live to reproduce.  So I don't think the eggs will be that bad...  Young herd animals are often slower anyway, so some herd animals will encircle their young; then it wouldn't matter if they were mobile or not.

In a game with this large of a scope, I don't think they will or that it would be a good idea to bother with such a trivial detail.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: MorgothTheEnemy on June 25, 2006, 11:09:04 pm
What if I want my creature to perform Mitosis? Or I rather have give birth to live babies instead of eggs?


Can I do so, or will I only be able to lay eggs? Laying eggs is primitive and it makes the race more vunerable.

too bad.

jk i just aint gonna read the whole discussion
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Chaosenigma on June 26, 2006, 12:06:15 am
but the platapus also has a beak and the tail of a beaver.

hmm..

the platapus is a Spore kind of creature:P

Heya, i'm an aussie and a few corrections and additions:

The platypus has a'bill', like a ducks bill, not a beak
It's tail is covered in fur and has more meat in it (they dont build dams so tails arent as hard as beavers)
They have poison spurs in their front claws so pissing them off aint advised ^^

But other than that YES THEY ARE WIERD being an egg laying mammal
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Chickenman297 on June 26, 2006, 02:13:28 am
Heya, i'm an aussie and a few corrections and additions:

The platypus has a'bill', like a ducks bill, not a beak
It's tail is covered in fur and has more meat in it (they dont build dams so tails arent as hard as beavers)
They have poison spurs in their front claws so pissing them off aint advised ^^

But other than that YES THEY ARE WIERD being an egg laying mammal
... and they are amphibious as well :o
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on June 26, 2006, 04:11:01 am
Sure, the platypus is weird, but when you look at a lot of the species here on earth, so are an aweful lot of others. In a matter of fact, some of them look downright alien. Crabs for instance. Ostriches. Naked mole rats. Giant centipedes. Giant squids. Jellyfish. Leeches. Just because we get familiar with certain kinds of mammal, it doesnt mean they still arent perculiar or odd, its just that we got so used to seeing them that the weird-factor wore off. If you look at a lot of sealife or insects, you'll see a lot of amazing things. Particularly with sealife, where if you disclude the generic fish types, a lot of the life seems parasitic and the almost prehistoric appearance/design is pretty common. Man, I feel like downloading and watching some animal documentaries now...
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: slugfly on June 26, 2006, 05:07:12 am
They're pretty weird for being venemous mammals too... are there any other mammals that are venemous?
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Xanadu on June 26, 2006, 06:51:32 am
EGGS! thats all , all will hatch by eggs  ,  dont you think  changing the model proportions etc. would be a pain in the a$$?
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on June 26, 2006, 07:05:57 am
EGGS! thats all , all will hatch by eggs , dont you think changing the model proportions etc. would be a pain in the a$$?
No, there is a possibility that eggs wont be the only middlepoint. Like everything else, its a wait and see deal.
As far as being a pain in the ass goes, I figure making a game of this degree at all would be a pain in the ass, compared to making the editors or figuring out the winning procedural generation formulas for different things? Adding an alternate to eggs would be a piece of cake in comparison :P

Its WW's baby, he'll only let things go through if it fits in with his vision, and if its a viable option given the time they have left. Fingers crossed for loads of cool (but unnecessasry) customisation options, and loads of different things to add personality to the things we make. :3
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: The Terminator on June 26, 2006, 07:30:49 am
EGGS! thats all , all will hatch by eggs , dont you think changing the model proportions etc. would be a pain in the a$$?
No, there is a possibility that eggs wont be the only middlepoint. Like everything else, its a wait and see deal.
As far as being a pain in the ass goes, I figure making a game of this degree at all would be a pain in the ass, compared to making the editors or figuring out the winning procedural generation formulas for different things? Adding an alternate to eggs would be a piece of cake :P

Its WW's baby, he'll only let things go through if it fits in with his vision, and if its a viable option given the time they have left. Fingers crossed for loads of cool (but unnecessasry) customisation options, and loads of different things to add personality to the things we make. :3

Agreed
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Protoavis on June 26, 2006, 03:27:19 pm
They're pretty weird for being venemous mammals too... are there any other mammals that are venemous?

Solenodon, Eurasian ater shrew, Northern short-tailed shrew.

To correct the platypus comment earlier, it's only males that have the poisonous spur and it's in the hind legs, not the front legs.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: darkstar on June 26, 2006, 06:55:06 pm
while having creatures have other methods of birth besides eggs would be more realistic and interesting it would add no real additional value to the game and would take them more time to put in.

Perhaps in an expansion pack...
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: HordeOfDoom on June 26, 2006, 07:53:03 pm
while having creatures have other methods of birth besides eggs would be more realistic and interesting it would add no real additional value to the game and would take them more time to put in.

Perhaps in an expansion pack...

I agree 100%. Its better to get the entire game fully working and somewhat polished rather than adding in a few tiny somewhat useless features.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: slugfly on June 27, 2006, 09:14:51 pm
Are aestheticly placed flying bugs and flowers useless?  If we can't interact with them

Are clouds useless?  If it rains at all, we only need to shift the sky color grey.

Is having a nest useless?  We can just as easily put eggs on the ground.

Is having different shape eyes useless?  We could easily just select a slider for the type of vision independant of the eye shape.

We're talking about grey scales here.  Every detail they put in the game adds to immersion and therefore adds to the greatness of the game.  Even aside from that there are loads of benefits to choosing between eggs or live young.  (partial reiteration here)

Eggs:
protective casing (more "hp") till it's nearly fully developed, but immobile
takes less energy to care for an egg, but limits your freedom to roam
can have more young at one time, but they're much smaller

Live:
can move around and attack (very weakly) from birth, but very low "hp"
you can take your young with you (or follow adults as young), but the parent needs to carry the child requiring greater energy
young are born larger and therefore safer (more "hp" compared to post-egg babies), but less young in a litter than in a clutch

This would be an entirely useful addition, as much so as working camouflage, social skills, tails, etc.  And it would add loads to the individuality of a creature, allowing us greater divisions and classifications between your animal and mine.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: ChristianSkunk on June 27, 2006, 10:38:49 pm
I'm starting to agree.  I think it'd be interesting if you could evolve more than just outward body structure and senses.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: google_video_fan on June 27, 2006, 10:43:36 pm
er... i think it's idiotically obvious that Wright knows about womb-births. It's just MUCH easier to use eggs.

Less mess. Less ESRB fuss. Less complications!

Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: 762 on June 27, 2006, 10:45:25 pm
I'm starting to agree.  I think it'd be interesting if you could evolve more than just outward body structure and senses.

It would be nice... For spore 2. As it stands now, the entire point is to make your creature look the way you want it to. There's no functional meaning beyond the parts other than the level of strenght, stealth, etc.

So don't hold your breath.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: slugfly on June 28, 2006, 05:29:36 am
psshh!

I say it again... psshh!

Much easier to use eggs:  the only thing they need to do is have a gestation period (a visible timer between mating and birth).  If the mating and birth mechanics are already in, the timer is little more than an afternoon's work.  As for the mess, dropping eggs is the same function as dropping babies... and can be accomplished the same way (some snazzy music and *poof* you got 2-7 babies running about... click one to enter the editor).  This would be slightly more than an afternoon's work, but not much more.

The point is looks:  psshh!  One more time for certainty... psshh!  If appearances were more important than content then Wright would be little more than a flunky working for somebody else's studio.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on June 28, 2006, 05:48:11 am
The point is looks:  psshh!  One more time for certainty... psshh!  If appearances were more important than content then Wright would be little more than a flunky working for somebody else's studio.
And your avatar would have a curly little villainous moustache and a tophat :3
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: The Terminator on June 28, 2006, 08:07:11 am
Are aestheticly placed flying bugs and flowers useless? If we can't interact with them

Are clouds useless? If it rains at all, we only need to shift the sky color grey.

Is having a nest useless? We can just as easily put eggs on the ground.

Is having different shape eyes useless? We could easily just select a slider for the type of vision independant of the eye shape.

We're talking about grey scales here. Every detail they put in the game adds to immersion and therefore adds to the greatness of the game. Even aside from that there are loads of benefits to choosing between eggs or live young. (partial reiteration here)

Eggs:
protective casing (more "hp") till it's nearly fully developed, but immobile
takes less energy to care for an egg, but limits your freedom to roam
can have more young at one time, but they're much smaller

Live:
can move around and attack (very weakly) from birth, but very low "hp"
you can take your young with you (or follow adults as young), but the parent needs to carry the child requiring greater energy
young are born larger and therefore safer
(more "hp" compared to post-egg babies), but less young in a litter than in a clutch

This would be an entirely useful addition, as much so as working camouflage, social skills, tails, etc. And it would add loads to the individuality of a creature, allowing us greater divisions and classifications between your animal and mine.

I don't see zebras or elephants carrying there babies. I think the "defend the female" idea would be more practical (And realistic) in an expansion pack or a sequel.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on June 28, 2006, 09:40:15 am
Quote
I think the "defend the female" idea would be more practical (And realistic) in an expansion pack or a sequel.
Why would it be more practical and realistic in an expansion pack, rather than in the main game itself?
The less expansion packs the better, stuff it all in the main release and have the new features filter down to us in patches. I dont want to surf a site full of content to download, only to have 90% of it unavailable to me due to a little mark that says "Only works with expansion packs 3, 5 and 12".

I wouldnt mind buying a SINGLE expansion pack, provided it actually had a lot of new features, instead of a handful of new items and perhaps 2 new mouths (which apparently would make up enough to call it an expansion pack, wheras I would call it a pay-patch).
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: ChristianSkunk on June 28, 2006, 10:06:20 am
I don't see zebras or elephants carrying there babies. I think the "defend the female" idea would be more practical (And realistic) in an expansion pack or a sequel.

I'm pretty sure they were talking about "carrying offspring to term", i.e., pregnancy.

Edit:  Didn't notice I had typoed until someone quoted it.  :P
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Mjavabean on June 28, 2006, 12:12:22 pm
It would be a bit hard for the gameplay, maybe same as eggs - but instead of it being 'eggs', tiny versions of your creature?

But that would eliminate the sense of evolution, and a single family line - a blue creature would look blue when it is immobile, but what if I decide green is my faverout colour?

Really, the only other possibility is the female lying down in the nest, while you have to protect her.

The flaw with that idea is that there is only 1 person defending, unless the immobile female defends herself with her claws/spikes/teeth/rubber-chicken-with-a-pulley-in-the-middle.

Even then, as the female wouldn't move, more evelution points will have to be added, and that is a pain in the ar(tichoke) to balance out.

Make up your own mind about it, as these aren't oppinions.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on June 28, 2006, 12:17:15 pm
Quote
rubber-chicken-with-a-pulley-in-the-middle.
Monkey Island ftw :3
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: ChristianSkunk on June 28, 2006, 12:34:07 pm
Why would the female be immobile?  How many species on Earth don't move while pregnant?  Now, when she's about to give birth (the equivalent of the eggs hatching) she'd need a nest and you'd need to protect her, but she still should be able to strike out.  Then, just like with the eggs, when she's giving birth, you go into the editor.  From then on it'd be like it would be with eggs.  Except perhaps you get a larger socialization bonus without having to play with your siblings, and the parents would stick near you to help protect you.  Maybe even hunt and bring you back something.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: slugfly on June 28, 2006, 09:21:45 pm
I don't see zebras or elephants carrying there babies. I think the "defend the female" idea would be more practical (And realistic) in an expansion pack or a sequel.

Quote from: ChristianSkunk
I'm pretty sure they were talking about "carrying offsprint to term", i.e., pregnancy.

Thank you...
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Jarax on June 29, 2006, 06:39:15 am
I'm wondering did some people on this forum hatch from an egg couse they thing that pregnancy is so unnatural.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: 762 on June 29, 2006, 06:45:41 am
I'm wondering: did some people on this forum hatch from an egg, because they think that pregnancy is so unnatural.

It's not that it's unnatural, it's that it's really not important enough to put in the game. It would be a huge project for the Maxis team, and for what? So we can pretend that our animals are mammals? I don't care at all. When it comes right down to it:

IT'S JUST AESTHETIC

Would you rather have your creature carry the young, or have 20 new tools on your UFO? Carry the young versus new depth to the civ game? Carry the young versus some important bugfixes?

When you realize that Spore does not have every developer in the world working on it, and they actually have a small development team working on such a massive game, you realize that it's not going to be an exact simulation of everything we have on earth.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on June 29, 2006, 07:29:14 am
Quote
It's not that it's unnatural, it's that it's really not important enough to put in the game. It would be a huge project for the Maxis team, and for what? So we can pretend that our animals are mammals? I don't care at all. When it comes right down to it:

IT'S JUST AESTHETIC
The problem here, is that you assume adding things into the game just for aesthetics would need a "huge project". The game is in development, many changes are going to be made, new ideas will be added, old ideas may have to be clipped out. Given the game is so far from release, what comes from the fanbase as just a cosmetic idea might be implemented in a way that has real effects. In a game where nearly everything is procedurally generated, and where the behaviour and 'flags' they have determine what they will do, and how they interact with the world, different forms of transition between each generation would be a good little feature. It may in fact be impossible without rewriting all code on top of it, it may in fact be incredibly easy to slip it, or it may in fact already be in, or expected to be pruned out. We dont know, we're just saying it would be nice to have, and its up to the guys making the game to either take the idea on-board and try to work it in (assuming they occasionally sift through the forums), or reject the idea for reasons that only they know the truth behind.

Quote
Would you rather have your creature carry the young, or have 20 new tools on your UFO? Carry the young versus new depth to the civ game? Carry the young versus some important bugfixes?
The problem with this thinking, is that you must assume you know how much work goes into different parts of the game, the difficulty of making such changes, and how much time it would take to add correctly. With this logic, we could bomb all future suggestions of any sort out of the water, because it could potentially be preventing other parts of the game from developing, or being expanded, or being checked over and fixed. I say let the suggestions roll, and let them do as they will with them. The suggestion of carrying young, or substituting the eggs with a pregnant female, or even making your avatar creature an asexual reproducer, are all likely to be doable, it mostly falls down to a matter of "Does it fit in with the game experience/vision, and can we squeeze this in?". We cannot answer that question, only the makers of Spore can.

Quote
When you realize that Spore does not have every developer in the world working on it, and they actually have a small development team working on such a massive game, you realize that it's not going to be an exact simulation of everything we have on earth.
When you realise that we're evolving an amoeba to a spacefaring demigod, and is being worked on by a small development team, and that they already have many 'alternate' bridging points in the game, and this is no different, then it doesnt seem so impossible. Whilst it isnt actually necessary, neither is the ability to give the player such massive freedom over content creation, nor is procedural animation, but they are there. Its not needlessly complex, its not asking for accurate simulation of real life, its simply asking for an alternate to eggs for every creature, seeing as we have great creativity in every other section. A few little alternates would help retain the feeling of the uniqueness of each species. I do have to agree that making things too complex will bring the game down, but asking for alternates to keep up with the variety in the rest of the game isnt exactly going to cripple Spores workforce. If they can manage it, they'll add it, if not, oh well.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: slugfly on June 29, 2006, 07:32:27 am
It would be a huge project for the Maxis team, and for what?

IT'S JUST AESTHETIC


Are aestheticly placed flying bugs and flowers useless?  If we can't interact with them

Are clouds useless?  If it rains at all, we only need to shift the sky color grey.

Is having a nest useless?  We can just as easily put eggs on the ground.

Is having different shape eyes useless?  We could easily just select a slider for the type of vision independant of the eye shape.

We're talking about grey scales here.  Every detail they put in the game adds to immersion and therefore adds to the greatness of the game.  Even aside from that there are loads of benefits to choosing between eggs or live young.  (partial reiteration here)

Eggs:
protective casing (more "hp") till it's nearly fully developed, but immobile
takes less energy to care for an egg, but limits your freedom to roam
can have more young at one time, but they're much smaller

Live:
can move around and attack (very weakly) from birth, but very low "hp"
you can take your young with you (or follow adults as young), but the parent needs to carry the child requiring greater energy
young are born larger and therefore safer (more "hp" compared to post-egg babies), but less young in a litter than in a clutch

This would be an entirely useful addition, as much so as working camouflage, social skills, tails, etc.  And it would add loads to the individuality of a creature, allowing us greater divisions and classifications between your animal and mine.

I don't see how something so simple while at the same time adding so much variation can find so many naysayers among us...   There are much more complex and yet less noticeable ideas being thrown around that are being hailed as excellent suggestions that most of us hope will be in the game (for example, camouflage having more of an effect than just pretty colors on an animal)
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: 762 on June 29, 2006, 07:48:05 am
Something as simple as dual-wielding shortswords was left out of oblivion, even though it sounds like a huge advantage to the game for a small development expense. But the truth is that it would have taken months and months to implement this. What I'm trying to say is, would you rather have Spore pushed back months and months so they can make live births? Would you want them to cut out other parts of the development so they have have live births?

I agree that it would be a nice feature, but it's not nice enough to warrant more than .5% of their time working on it.

And sorry for being a jerk, I'm just not in a good place right now...
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: slugfly on June 29, 2006, 08:02:12 am
I'm not a programmer... but consider it from a logical perspective.

step 1)  take out the eggs, just make em invisible. (a debug cheat could do this, it can't be hard to code)
step 2)  add procedural swelling to your creature (don't say this is difficult when the entire game is about morphing creatures)
step 3)  take the egg timer (between laying and hatching) and put it on the swell instead
step 4)  instead of eggs hatching, reproduce the egg laying *poof* and bring the young out right where the parent is at the right time (something already done, except that the poof is placed on the appearance of young as opposed to the appearance of eggs)
step 5)  revert the parent to previous non-swelled shape (as simple as an undo)

voila... we have live birth...  Now (as I would like it) all that is needed is to add some subtle bonuses and penalties for choosing live birth over eggs.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: 762 on June 29, 2006, 08:26:52 am
With the current engine, you don't know how complicated that is, or if it's even possible at this point without a complete overhaul.

It would seem simple enough to dual-wield in oblivion too

1) Add the model for another sword in left hand
2) apply animantions to the second sword
3) when the sword moves, apply damage to attacked enemy

Apparently this system was way too complicated for some reason or another.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on June 29, 2006, 08:30:44 am
Quote
I agree that it would be a nice feature, but it's not nice enough to warrant more than .5% of their time working on it.
The thing about Oblivion is that its more action-centered, and left arms were always used as 'utility' hands, for holding torches and shields. The majority of the time used to make the left hand available to hold small weapons would be in simply creating the animations associated with the left hand for combat, and then creating the combat system for it. The combat system merely being which direction you hold when you click-hold the attack button (otherwise rapid clicks would play a preset loopable animation for swinging). The races, equipment and right-hand animations would each need to be compatable with the left hand animations. It wouldnt therefor be the difficulty of coding in such a thing, it would be the difficulty of coding it in without ruining the other things they've added.

Spore shouldnt have this problem, because the core system itself is designed to react to the way we design things, including tweaking the way the game-world forms around us. As I said, they may have coded it in some way (like Oblivion) to make it harder than it should be, to provide generation-passing alternates. The thing is, Spore works with procedural animation, and is designed to take a lot of input from the player, and then decide what content would be good to seed for them. Im not sure what the parameters would be, but similar flags and sliders could determine the method of passing generations. The animation is already dealt with procedurally, and the actual graphical changes should be far far easier to deal with considered that the creatures, and even the buildings, terrain and so forth, are all mutable, and the majority of the game was designed with this freedom of design in mind, everything is designed to be 'compatable' by default. Freedom was designed as part of the plan, Oblivion was instead supposed to be a stand-alone game with freedom to roam, a story that you wade through, rather than a story that you write. In the case of creatures, their models are designed to be easily mutable (see how children are exagerratedly kiddish copies of adults, who slowly reform into their intended shape), and so cutting out all the hoo-haa of realism, and adding stylised shortcuts through the birthing procedures (stamping a nest out of the floor quickly, crouching briefly and eggs appear underneith, model rubbing to humorous music for mating), it shouldnt be quite as difficult. It potentially could take months, but given the way the game is supposed to have been designed, and the variation involved in the game? It wouldnt surprise me if its already in there, and would surprise me further if it took months of their full workforce to implement such a thing.

I guess the point im trying to make is :
Quote
With the current engine, you don't know how complicated that is, or if it's even possible at this point without a complete overhaul.
You also dont know that it would take as long as other engines to add things in to. Oblivion is a very different game. Moddable yes, but creation in Spore isnt modding. I would like to see an even amount of features over the different stages of the game, but I wouldnt mind if Spore was pushed back a little to encorporate little things like this, as it leaves the game feeling more 'finished'. In my eyes, to go as far to make a game as broad and as customisable as Spore, but then leave out some obvious little bits that whilst not necessary, add more sense of depth, is akin to baking the worlds largest cake but then not being bothered to put a single cherry on the top. That is just what these little features are, the cherry on the top of a giant cake. Unnecessary, but they complete the experience. They may as well give you freedom to add as many legs as you want, but limit your arms to two or less. Do you get what im saying? To have everything so customised and tailored to you and your creature, but then leave the reproduction of every species, be it a huge mammoth, a tiny bird, a squidfish, a sluggy blob or a buttcreature, to produce the same eggs, the same size, the same way? I dont know. It wont kill the game but its one of those things that would make people think : "Thats a shame, it would have been better if that could happen slightly different for each species too".

The fewer amount of "thats a shame"s in this game, the better. So I remain hopeful.

Quote
And sorry for being a jerk, I'm just not in a good place right now...
It happens, but I dont think you were being a jerk. Pessimistic, but nowhere near a jerk. Thats life, opinions may vary ;)
Me? Im sorry for rambling on like an old man. Part of this is wishful thinking out loud :3
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Raisins on June 30, 2006, 11:07:58 pm
I'm not a programmer... but consider it from a logical perspective.

step 1)  take out the eggs, just make em invisible. (a debug cheat could do this, it can't be hard to code)
step 2)  add procedural swelling to your creature (don't say this is difficult when the entire game is about morphing creatures)
step 3)  take the egg timer (between laying and hatching) and put it on the swell instead
step 4)  instead of eggs hatching, reproduce the egg laying *poof* and bring the young out right where the parent is at the right time (something already done, except that the poof is placed on the appearance of young as opposed to the appearance of eggs)
step 5)  revert the parent to previous non-swelled shape (as simple as an undo)

voila... we have live birth...  Now (as I would like it) all that is needed is to add some subtle bonuses and penalties for choosing live birth over eggs.

I reward you with the 51st annual eCookie.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on July 01, 2006, 04:40:17 am
Quote
I reward you with the 51st annual eCookie.
I reward you with a blue peter badge for maintaining an excellent example of useless posts :3
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on July 01, 2006, 01:03:10 pm
Quote
The problem here, is that people assume adding things into the game would be easy.  Just throwing in the word procedural doesn't make it straightforward or simple.  Not to mention that there would be a big difference between procedural animation and procedural modeling... there are no autogenerated models for gender differentiation, which is a big clue there.
Quote
The eggs are icons... they don't represent one clutch, they represent your entire species. If you want to model the actual reproductive methods, then which of the infinite reproductive methods should be included? Do you get what I'm saying? How about species that reproduce with spores, or with three parents, or by infecting plants with animal DNA? Adding mammalian reproduction is a step backward, since you move from an iconic representation of reproduction (the egg) to a short list of unimaginative reproductive options.
I cant speak for others, but I personally dont think that anything is 'easy' when it comes to making games like this. Going as far to include species that reproduce with spores or infecting one another is a bit overkill in my eyes. The idea behind including more than just the one iconic method of reproduction, is a little extra depth. Before you go to point out the obvious that a few extra kinds of between-generation bridges isnt exactly going to add depth, in one way it will. With the sheer amount of customisability in this game, even if for the sake of keeping it simple, making eggs the only 'tween-point feels like a kick to the shin. Having one or two other ways it happens wouldnt appear to add that much more depth, but this is more of an ownership thing over ones own creature. You're right, its no big deal, but adding alternatives is far from a step backwards. How exactly does allowing alternates create a step backwards?

I know that slapping 'procedural' on everything doesnt make it suddenly easier to program with, but lets take the most obvious alternate as an example here, live birth from a carrying parent. No additional modelling is required. The creatures are fully mutable, they are operated in a manner that allows for physical appearance changes to happen easily. This is shown in the children and how they are exaggerated and reform to the shape they are supposed to have (...I said that before, didnt I? :D). A similar shape-change could be used to show a creature is carrying a child, and to keep things simple, they could be made immobile and once again sat in a nest. Where the eggs would be ready to hatch, the 'mother' would be ready to lay, and would just need clicking on in a similar manner. The only reason that this little cosmetic addition would be a bad idea, is if the creatures become fixed models once the editor is closed and the changes/evolution changes take effect, in which case it would be an incredible pain in the neck for that little effect. As it has been mentioned before, too much unnecessary detail and realism can easily kill a playful game like this, and I dont want to have it all end up smelling odd due to trying to be more realistic than it should try to be.

But with everything that is customisable, and how they apparently want us to own the experience, to write the story, to actually care about what goes on rather than watch it all happening in a detached manner... making every species use that same generation tween-point seems a little against that idea. I personally dont expect them to pour wasteful amounts of time and effort into things that actually have little impact on the game, but within reason, it would be good to see a little variation even there, so that there is no sudden feeling of a 'bottleneck' in the freedom and ownership of the way things go.

Assuming it is so hard to implement that it will put the game off by months, is just as bad as assuming its so easy they could slip it in within 5 minutes. A little variation from the single 'tween-point isnt exactly game-killing hyper-realism either, and so, back to the main of the thread : I merely hope there is more than just the eggs.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: slugfly on July 01, 2006, 02:38:02 pm

Trying to get the game to automatically morph every creature's body into something fat, would not be easy, and it is a safe bet that "the creatures become fixed models" as far as the play engine is concerned (the data format is compressed to a few k, remember).
Given the Sims games and the fact that you're merely temporarily altering a single axis of the base body part, I find it hard to believe that it would be a difficult thing to do.

Quote
Furthermore, such a non-scaling auto-morphing of creatures would randomly look horrible... you'd really end up needing to force the players to create multiple creature variations in the editor, for male, female, slightly pregnant, very pregnant, etc.
Who says it's not scaling?  Also, nobody said anything about male/female...  why do people automatically assume (several times in this thread and related ones) that eggs in fact do mysteriously appear on the ground shortly after mating whereas with live birth it's necessary (even in a video game) to show the birthing process with all it's blood and naughty bits?  It can be the same thing except that there's no eggs to find...

Quote
having to choose mammal or chicken reproduction, closes the door on all possibilities that are in the mind of the player.
Examples of alien reproduction methods

What you're saying here is that having to choose live young or eggs shuts the door on all possibilities...  but I don't understand...  you're saying that having more options gives us less options...

Quote
Transgender reproduction:  A species where all its members are born female.  (any kind of environmental pressure) turns them into males.
Though I'd love to see gender differences, pretty much everyone is in agreement that it's not in... besides, this thread is about something entirely different.

Quote
Necroingestic Reproduction:  A species ... who ... "mate" with their ... kills. 
(quote marks mine)

Parasitism would indeed be a fantastic addition to the game, but along with venoms, toxins and other specialized coolnesses not something we're likely to see.  You mentioned this as an example against being able to choose Live Birth, but instead of proving a point about it you just offered up yet another realistic way of caring for young that should be in the game.

I've yet to see anyone make a good point against including live birth.  At least with parasitism one could say that among visible creatures it's not very common and even among visible creatures the largest parisitic egg layers we get is like, wasps and such.


Quote
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on July 01, 2006, 02:51:18 pm
I think you misunderstood the meaning of iconic. The eggs symbolize reproduction (and evolution) not a method of reproduction... as an icon, not intending to be the real thing. Adding a method changes that... if you want an egg editor (like I do) and fashion static "whatevers" to replace this icon then we are actually in agreement, except for anything like procedural swelling or birth animation.
Oh, I understood alright, but eggs arent the only things that can serve as an icon of birth/reproduction/the passing of a generation. An egg editor would be fine, so the player could replace the eggs with small somewhat undetailed critter-like looking things for sitting in the nest, that would keep the system simple but the customisation up to speed. Still, having a little carry-time and swelling still might be good. Im not trying to make a blueprint of a much cooler idea, im just floating along on the tide of idle suggestions. The idea of fighting for a mate is pretty cool too, or protecting your mate for a while, perhaps whilst she finds a nesting site, is still interesting.

In one of the presentations, WW said something about game design working the opposite to how many people expect. Instead of adding as many features as they can within the time limit, its more about taking a gaming concept and seeing how much of the complexities you strip away without decreasing the game experience. Major jagged paraphrasing there, I know. We're asking for a lot, and sometimes keeping it simpler makes the game less tedious overall. However it wont stop us from churning out ideas that would be fun to see. You have to remember that until recently people were convinced that flying was out, and that slithering and tentacles were out, and some even still doubt underwater civs are in. I personally see eggs alone as a bit of a cop-out considering what other things have gone in, but I wont cry if thats all we get.

Quote
I think the overkill comment is an unsupported opinion, for alien creatures anything can happen... having to choose mammal or chicken reproduction, closes the door on all possibilities that are in the mind of the player.
My opinion doesnt need support from others. I never said eggs or live births alone, im simply suggesting that some alternate methods, even simple ones, would be better than just eggs all the time, especially if you cant even alter the eggs. Comparing live-birth to genetic infection just doesnt really work, in my opinion, given the ways we've suggested it could be worked into the game. Live birth is far simpler than genetic infection. We dont want gushing animations and hyper-realism, just something other than the same old thing for every species. Another part of the "wow, so thats how they'd do it" factor.

Quote
You may call these overkill but they are simple examples that are just as reasonable as mammalian reproduction.
I call them overkill because of the extra work it could involve, whereas carrying a child and laying an egg could be done essentially with the same code, only with a mere cosmetic change. By comparison, carrying a child is far simpler than the samples you listed. If you are going to argue that adding some simple alternates is just too much, but then go on to say eggs+live birth isnt enough, you're really jumping between which side you're argueing for. You're basically saying that if we have -any- variation, we should be able to have really imaginitive and complex variants, but if we cant have the more outlandish ones, then we shouldnt even have plain old live birth, and be satisfied with just eggs. All or nothing. And I disagree. I believe a few simple alternates would be good, and would have absolutely no adverse effects if done right. Thats it. Thats all im saying. You do seem to be hopping around in making your point, and I cant really see what you're getting at... are you just stating a differing opinion (all or nothing), or is there more to it that im either missing or you're not being clear enough on?
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: slugfly on July 01, 2006, 05:40:51 pm
I like your avatar, but I think you're just being stubborn dude...

I can list dozens more reproductive methods that would require less code changes than your 'cosmetic' mammalian changes.
Name just one animal reproductive method (vertibrate animals, we're not including mitosis or regenerating heart and brain here), forget about it requiring more or less code changes, just name one other reproductive method beyond eggs and live young, and give examples.  Keep in mind that even if we allow for insects, parasites still lay eggs.  It's the location that changes not the reproductive method.  I know that live births would be so simple it could be modded in by mediocre tech-savy fans.

Quote
(belly swells) That belly change would most certainly be a huge programing issue, not a cosmetic codeless change.
So we leave the belly swell out.  There are few animals that a lay person (ie. someone who doesn't study animals of that kingdom) can tell is carrying just by looking.

Quote
As I said before, for such a change, you'd really need to have multiple models for each species in the creature editor... which gives the added overhead of increasing the bandwidth of creature downloads and increasing the creature editing complexity... all for a reproductive sequence that lasts a minute or two.
  A 0/1 feature.  0=egg, 1=live... done...   And the sequence may last a minute or two, but then again young doesn't last long either, so what's the point in putting young in at all?  Why not have them full grown when you exit the editor?  Having young introduces so many coding problems, they have to figure out how to reduce all animals (and we've seen the editor break a few times when testing the Babies feature) in size with various proportion changes so that they look like young creatures...

Quote
And with live birth, when you click on the young/female to open the editor, how are you going to explain the entire species being mutated by those changes?  Clicking on that egg transforms the entire world... Sure the egg icon is a little symbolically cliche... but it doesn't threaten to compromise the entire game model.
er...  this one makes no sense at all.  How can you explain changing one egg resulting in the entire species changing, being mutated by those changes?   There is no difference in regards to the game mechanics between clicking an egg to go to the editor and clicking a carrying parent to go to the editor.  For that matter, how does clicking a carrying parent, or eliminating the egg, destroy the entire game model?  It still fits...  if anything the option supports the concept of the game.

Quote
a choice of egg layer vs mammal is more of a predetermined content issue.
You know...  there are reptiles that have live young too... not many, granted, but in wanting live birth understand that we're not after milk, tits, external genitals and the whole 9 yards that comes with mammals... we're just asking for an option.

Quote
Player generated species reproductive cycles seem far beyond the scope of the game.
What reproductive cycles?  We're not talking menstruation or heat here, we're just talking about the difference between external and internal fertilization.

Quote
Hoping for an Egg Editor, and heck even a Nest Editor, I think would be cool community requests for expanded avenues of player created content.  However, again considering the duration of the creature reproductive cycle, I am not sure it is a valuable use of team-spore time.
  We can edit the types of leaves on trees...  If adding variety and depth to the game isn't a valuable use of time then what might be?  As far as we know color matching and camouflage won't be in the game either so what's the point of adding color differences?  So many patterns?  Even as I mentioned before, eye shape and eye size?

As I said at the beginning, I suspect at this point that you're just being combative...  and I'm feeling tired and therefore very combative.  Perhaps it would be to both of our best interests if I just stayed out of this thread but I can't... I just can't...  partially because I like this idea, but mostly because I don't like that someone is trying to sink it.  Options = good.  I really don't see the problem.  Watch how simple this can be, even more than my last post where I did this:

step 1)  Remove the egg image/model after "the deed"
step 2)  Put an icon over your creatures head to say that it's carrying a child.
step 3)  Double click (or right click, or ctrl-Z-shift-F-backspace) to open the editor just as you would with an egg.
step 4)  Young is born

You really can't tell me that removing a visual representation or adding a 2 dimensional icon are difficult things...
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on July 01, 2006, 06:23:10 pm
I call them overkill because of the extra work it could involve, whereas carrying a child and laying an egg could be done essentially with the same code, only with a mere cosmetic change. By comparison, carrying a child is far simpler than the samples you listed.
Not at all... and I can list dozens more reproductive methods that would require less code changes than your 'cosmetic' mammalian changes. That so-called cosmetic change you envision would be harder than the random differentiating changes (to make all individuals different) in another thread. And who is to say that the belly swells? What if the creature doesn't have a belly? How about swelling any other random body part, like a crest on the head, or a tail, or a camel-like hump? That belly change would most certainly be a huge programing issue, not a cosmetic codeless change. As I said before, for such a change, you'd really need to have multiple models for each species in the creature editor... which gives the added overhead of increasing the bandwidth of creature downloads and increasing the creature editing complexity... all for a reproductive sequence that lasts a minute or two.
Feel free to list them then.

When I said a cosmetic change, I meant the version of live-birth where instead of laying eggs at a stomped nesting site, the mother actually sits in the nest and becomes a static object in place of the eggs. She doesnt even have to look any different, she just sits there and lets her biology (assumed underneith her, obscured by the nest) do the rest, and as she settles and waits for the birth, conserving her energy, predators come to attack the sluggish, stubborn, unmoving female (the same as they would with the eggs). When she is about to give birth, the nest gets its glowy aura, and she makes long grunting sounds as if she is uncomfortable. You click on her, you go to the editor, and there, you're done. All that was changed, was what sat in the nest.

We are still working on assumations. The creatures may or may not become seperate, solid, non-mutable models whilst in the active game. If they become solid models, then it would need more models to show the bulk of carrying a child. If they dont become solid unmovable models and still have the ability to morph fluidly (and given their physics, this seems just as likely), then free mutation makes the bulge of carrying a child easy. I'll say it a third time. Children are exaggeratedly small copies of adults, who slowly regain their adult shapes. If they can do this, its likely that other deformations in the 'standard' model can take place. Bulge in the stomach? Who ever assumed the stomach area was going to bulge? If the game can work out where the markings are placed, and can work out how they'll walk and attack, it can also work out where the creature is most likely to store a live child (if the game decides your creature is the kind to carry its young).

Quote
And with live birth, when you click on the young/female to open the editor, how are you going to explain the entire species being mutated by those changes? Clicking on that egg transforms the entire world... Sure the egg icon is a little symbolically cliche... but it doesn't threaten to compromise the entire game model.
And clicking on a child-carrying creature threatens to compromise the entire game model how, exactly? Clicking an egg to decide the next generation (or however many generations in the future the game skips to) is only as game-breaking as clicking on an egg dressed up to look like one of your creatures.

Quote
Now an Egg Editor, the consequences would be entirely up to the content creator... while, a choice of egg layer vs mammal is more of a predetermined content issue. Player generated species reproductive cycles seem far beyond the scope of the game. Hoping for an Egg Editor, and heck even a Nest Editor, I think would be cool community requests for expanded avenues of player created content. However, again considering the duration of the creature reproductive cycle, I am not sure it is a valuable use of team-spore time.
So rather than give us new editors for the egg/nest, user friendly fool-proof ones, they could just use other procedural methods to determine how nests and eggs would look, and work on some simple alternates just eggs, just like this thread is suggesting would be nice.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: ChristianSkunk on July 01, 2006, 07:06:22 pm
Just wanted to point out...  If they can figure out what on your creature is the head and exaggerate it for the young as in the demo, why couldn't they make the 'belly' swell.  WW said himself about how his creature walked, that no one knows how it's supposed to walk, so how can they be wrong?  (Paraphrasing.)  The same goes for this.  In some weird, messed up alien, how can you say where the womb is and isn't?  It seems to me you'd just pick a spot along the spine and enlarge the area, just like you would in the creature editor with the mouse wheel, sculpting the creature.  If this isn't possible... well, it wouldn't make sense.  The only problem would be with whether or not there can be individuals that differ in some way from one another, or if one changes, they all change to match.  I can see where that'd be, since it'd cut down on what you'd need to run large numbers of a certain creature, but, well, we know some will be different from the others in health points, energy, stuff like that, so a pregnant flag that causes a procedural swelling shouldn't be a problem.  Just barkin' in the dark here.  I really have no idea.   ;D
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on July 01, 2006, 07:21:42 pm
Just barkin' in the dark here. I really have no idea. ;D
Just like the rest of us :3
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on July 01, 2006, 07:45:03 pm
Quote
When I said a cosmetic change, I meant the version of live-birth where instead of laying eggs at a stomped nesting site, the mother actually sits in the nest and becomes a static object in place of the eggs.
This is different from the static offspring in a nest idea. I can hear the protests and complaints about sexism already. I won't go into how pregnant females are usually at their most dangerous.
Sexism? "Mother" doesnt necessarily relate to male or female in a game that doesnt specify gender. You were the one saying it takes too much work to even have a creature carry the child and then lay it after a time, I was giving a simplified example of how such a thing could be done. You are still hopping between your points and to be frank, i've seriously lost what direction you are heading in.

Quote
So rather than give us new editors for the egg/nest, user friendly fool-proof ones, they could just use other procedural methods to determine how nests and eggs would look, and work on some simple alternates just eggs, just like this thread is suggesting would be nice.
Procedural methods are not magic bullets or automatically fool-proof themselves. They don't replace the need for code, they are a compact (not necessarily simple) type of code. I would wager that an egg/nest editor would be easier than adding procedural code for egg/offspring/nest variety.
*facepalms, and grunts*
Okay, 'procedural methods' was a bad choice of phrase because it still left room for you to pick unnecessary flaws in it. Something simple could be done, like working out the color of the eggs based on the color and overlays of the current species, the shape of the eggs could be modified based on physical parameters of the species, as opposed to creating entirely new editors for them. That is just an example. I said 'procedural method' meaning that the game goes through a procedure to gather the info on how exactly to generate the eggs. By generation I mean how they will be created upon spawn, tailored to the current species rather than as a prefabricated, predetermined item. I had already covered that I realise 'procedural methods' are not magic bullets and that they themselves take time to create and so forth, I dont intend to repeat myself again for the sake of patching over what now appears to me as an exhausted vein of conversation.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Uroboros on July 02, 2006, 06:32:51 am
Yeah, despite the lack of gender differentiation it would be commonly taken as sexist. I even found the idea rather offensive... and I don't generally care for political correctness.
I hate to sound obnoxious here, but if people are offended that I called an alien creature who carries a child a "Mother" (due to real-world comparisons) as opposed to a "gender-unspecific child-carrier", they can just eat a huge bag of GTFO. Seriously. Political correctness is fine if its a reasonably sensitive subject, but over-political-correctness on subjects that arent exactly sensitive matters, or have been used in a reasonable context based on how normal language works, is just a waste of energy. Sorry you found it offensive, bud, but it isnt going to change!

Quote
Was I supposed to have a direction? ;)
No, not at all. :3

Quote
Just a guess about the youngling exaggerations... I bet the blob is just scaled down (with no head determination) and the appendages are just scaled up. In the RW crash, the limbs were probably so crowded together that they couldn't fit on the smaller blob.
Maybe, but given that the limbs can phase through one another freely, that wouldnt seem like such a big thing. The six-legged egg-eating spider-thingy in the more recent videos also had limb attachment points that were pretty close together. I still personally think it was down to the computer and bad luck, but yeah, the fact its an unfinished game probably played a part in the crash too.
Title: Re: Not all species lay eggs!
Post by: Aybraus on July 02, 2006, 06:55:57 am
Judging from the demo, your creature is male, so tending to eggs or protecting your mate are pretty similar.  Budding might be different, though.