I would like to point out that, in a Precambrian world, a Sponges ability to move 4 mm a year was likely considered a decent movement speed compared to other creatures in that time period, while of course, after the Cambrian Explosion, it is essentially Sessile by comparison to what movement evolved too.
2 Likes
Maybe sessility could be a relative term in a part?
2 Likes
Would a Sloth be on the very low end of what is considered to motile?
2 Likes
Eh itβs still lightning fast when compared to an olm for instance
4 Likes
talking about a game where in your step from The Sims to Simcity
So it would like The Sims (individuals) to Sim Ant (colony) to Simcity (village/city) to Sim Earth (planet)?
I think by limiting things to the more fundamental cell types, we can keep tissue editing limited to very few, very impactful events
Also, this could increase replayability. Instead of making one organism with every tissue at once, now that I am limited, I have to play several times - one for each membrane type. Of course, this is a trade off, depending on how unlocks for tissues are implemented, it could be more bothersome. One notable example is with Shadow the Hedgehog (2005) game, where you were forced to play the same stages several times (especially the first stagge) in order to get all the endings, which was needed to unlock the true ending of the game
3 Likes
Well iirc Thrive wonβt have a true ending so we donβt need to worry about this sort of tediousness
2 Likes
I am usually a big advocate for permanent choices, but in this case I think it would be logical if a species that starts the Macroscopic Stage as sessile can still unlock the ability to become motile later on. though for example unlocking muscle should be more expensive and difficult than in Multicellular.
I am see a pattern here with being able to changes being made more expensive as you go down the line, which does make sense evolutionary. Also, I do like this idea of being able to become motile later on, as it increases the possible gameplay styles without permanently locking players out of being able to progress, at least, up to a certain point.
So in my opinion we either have:
- Sufficient max speed = Motile.
- Not Motile = Sessile.
Or:
- Sufficient max speed = Motile
- Not motile and has a holdfast = Sessile
- Not motile and no holdfast = Floating βsessileβ
(speed that is too low βrounds down to 0β, becoming sessile)
I think if we add a system for sessile gameplay, it could handle non-anchored sessile life as well? Itβs the same core problem: not much things to actively do, so you need some way to skip time.
I think the second set with Motile and two categories of sessile, with the added floating category, would be better. Would this floating category also be the case for potential floating organisms in the air? Also, what if an organism is sessile and anchored for only part of its life, like with some cnidarians or Stentors? Would the organismβs overall speed score be reduced, or would each stage of life be separately scored?
5 Likes
I think the division along the lifestages would make the most sense, as itβd be useful for other stuff too
4 Likes
Also, if an organism rests/sleeps a lot, should that affect an organismβs speed score?
2 Likes
No I donβt think it should since itβs a temporary state
4 Likes
I agree. Floating Creatures need to be accounted for.
I think it has been said before that the plan is to score them separately.
2 Likes
So would that be some sort of a hybrid category for such changelings in terms of motility?
2 Likes
In this case, the Motile/Sessile separation would be used to decide βthis species does not actively do anything, so use the βsessile game-modeβ (if we have it).β For things passively floating in the air without the ability to actively move, I imagine it would be the same as things doing so in the water.
I would hope we can treat each separately.
It would mean:
- You might control one lifestage in βnormal modeβ and the other in βsessile modeβ
- the terrain generation can use the sessile stage as flora placement.
4 Likes
Would the game be biased to generally spawn more of the sessile form since the sessile organismsβd be easier to simulate?
2 Likes
Assuming that using one lifestage as flora is possible and we decide to do so, that might fairly automatically happen because the flora system can handle many more organisms.
Though I suppose now this also starts overlapping with the auto-evo system and population calculation.
3 Likes
Hopefully is it balanced in a way that makes the most sense scientifically
2 Likes
It also will serve as another buffer against making everything unnecessarily complex in your animal. Why shouldnβt your cow have a respiratory system as efficient as a hummingbird? Well, that takes up very valuable nervous system capacity. Why doesnβt everything have hawk eyes? Well, supporting that kind of capacity takes up a lot of coordination from the nervous system.
In Spore, there was a complexity meter to prevent excessive complexity, which I donβt think should be the case for Thrive. I hope Players could still create creatures with excessive complexity if they wanted to.
2 Likes
I think Deus is talking about the ability to evolve a larger complexity meter over time and the need to acquire the energy needed to support it.
3 Likes
Iβm pretty sure some βmore advancedβ eyes can come with certain drawbacks. For instance owls cannot move their eyes iirc
4 Likes
Yeah, I just hope it does not stifle creativity. Would there be a separate βcomplexity metersβ for function and appearance?
2 Likes