What Do You Want to See in the Macroscopic Editor?

Future Game Macroscopic Stage
1

Some of the developers have been having discussions on the macroscopic editor on the developer forums. I’ve been posting a series of concepts on the thread detailing ways we can deal with different aspects of the editor, as well as important biological phenomena to prioritize.

The posts highlighted before are what I consider to be the most recent takes on the macroscopic editor, relevant to this discussion:

I want to first note that the ideas in the post aren’t guaranteed to be what the actual macroscopic editor looks like, and currently, any conceptualized mechanic in those posts is exactly what a “concept” is supposed to be: a potential idea to deal with the macroscopic editor, being explored, expanded, and critiqued, until it is ultimately accepted or rejected. We could decide to throw away every idea in those posts tomorrow if we decide that isn’t the direction we want to take Thrive. So don’t take an explanation given in this thread or the developer thread as a bonafide explanation of how your favorite adaptation will be handled.

With that said, here’s the point of this thread! Name your favorite adaptation, anatomical structure, body plan, etc. in the animal kingdom, and I’ll try to give a take on how it could work in Thrive, working with the mechanics that were conceptualized in those developer posts. This is based off more recent community discussion in this community post: Comments on Specific Development Forum Posts - #239 by Deus

Where a lot of recent questions and points seem to be asking on how a certain jaw, limb, appendage, etc. seen in the animal kingdom might be implemented. I’ve been finding these sort of questions to be useful for these reasons:

  • It lets me know what sort of organisms the community is hoping to create. Our priority system focuses on more widespread adaptations first, meaning certain niche adaptations, even if they are cool, might be neglected. If enough of the community really wants a certain, more niche trait, and if that trait is possible to implement, then it could be worth to investigate the feasibility of implementing that trait.

  • It’s directly testing and aiding the robustness of the mechanics described in the concept. If a requested adaptation fits nicely within the concepts highlighted, that lets me have more faith that the concept is capable of portraying a significant diversity of lifeforms. If a certain adaptation is difficult to fit with the existing concept (and the adaptation isn’t completely niche), that reveals a limitation of the concept that could potentially be fulfilled.

  • It helps to inform on what direction should be taken when it comes to filling out the editor catalogue/tools. If we notice a theme on the adaptations mentioned, that lets us know that a specific portion of the editor should be more fleshed out.

  • It gives new perspective on the concept. Us developers can only think of so much; we can easily miss a lot of seemingly obvious things.

Overall, it’s a great way to see how strong this concept is, potentially giving us a good base understanding on how one of the most important and unique features in Thrive could work. So, bombs away - what are some adaptations you would want to see in Thrive?

6 Likes
2

I wonder if there would be any organ systems “too niche” for being added to Thrive. Would the Lymphatic system for instance be like this?

3 Likes
3

I think HyperbolicHadron already had some thoughts on this, but Trichordates and Trisymmetry. Examples of such an organism would be…

or

Edit: It is late for me, so I will probably respond tomorrow.

4 Likes
4

Would such sorts of trisymmetry not fall under radial symmetry?

1 Like
5

This paper describes Triloboza, which most organisms under trisymmetry fall under.
Trilobozoa, Precambrian Tri-Radial Organisms
Would the way I tried to make a motile trisymmetrical organism in Choanozoa be a good way to approach organisms with symmetries other than just being bilateral?

2 Likes
6

I don’t think the symmetries will be introduced already in multicellular, but i suppose if taken into macroscopic this approach could work.

3 Likes
7

  1. How flexible will the parametrized parts system be? Will it allow you to create almost any mouth, foot, hand, etc., or will everything be limited to some basic shapes from which you won’t be able to deviate very much?

  2. You mentioned that editing of cell types will still be available at macroscopic stages. However, how will it affect the organism? What happens if you add a new flagellum, pili, mitochondria, etc. to the tissue?

I can also say that many bioengineering mechanics for the macroscopic and conscious stages can be extrapolated for technical objects of the industrial/society stage, etc., for example, additional pairs of wheels on equipment can provide additional cross-road ability, and calculations of the strength of buildings can occur in a similar way to calculating the strength of plants.

4 Likes
8

Or any sessile fellows really, since buildings can be underground too.

4 Likes
9

will very large cells, like eggs, be allowed to perform phagocytosis to get food?
it would obviously have to be simplified
but it would allow any microscopic creatures to be used as a food source for your eggs, and potentially even allow endosymbiosis in later stages of the game as well!
one example of this happening irl, though through completely different circumstances(as far as we know, it was by an egg getting cut open and infected by algae, but surviving, and growing into an adult, who then layed eggs containing the algae, and embryos from egg sacs containing the algae were more likely to survive due to the algae using ammonia and co2, and providing o2) is the yellow spotted salamander!

4 Likes
10

Non-bilateral symmetry is a bit rough to handle since bilateral symmetry will have the most significant progression and features layered on it, and it could be really difficult to smoothly transition things from non-bilateral symmetry to the bilateral progression.

Symmetry is probably worth a discussion post entirely in itself. I think if nothing else, “superficial trisymmetry” might be an option, where a combination of our sculpting tools and asymmetry options can be utilized to create something that looks trisymmetrical; but ultimately, that animal might still be traditionally symmetrical in Thrive, kind of like starfish. It’s something that can be explored more in a dedicated symmetry post however. I’m sure especially earlier in the stage, non-traditional symmetries can be present in some form; especially with a focus on surface area.

I do think the lymphatic system would be too niche and detailed to receive much attention in Thrive. If needed, and if something is decided to be important, I think some lymphatic capabilities might be just lumped into circulatory adaptations. The exact workings of the organ systems are deserving of a thread in itself, separate from external manipulation of metaballs.

Many forms and structures we see in the animal kingdom are alterations of the same, basic structures. I think if we are clever with our part selection customization options, we can simulate a whole bunch of diverging structures in a way that reflects a significant number of lifeforms on Earth.

image
image817×467 73.6 KB

image
image1280×720 60.4 KB

Of course, there will be implicit limitations to such a system, which is why sculpting is so emphasized in various discussions on the development forums. But if we provide solid customization tools, the same “part” can be dramatically transformed to look rather different on different animals. Instead of Spore’s approach to parts, where different versions of a mouth are present with minimal customization, Thrive’s approach could instead use fewer, much more customizable parts which can really differ in alteration and structure.

For example, the mouths I mention on this post: Macroscopic Editor, Progression, and Principles - #44 by Deus - Gameplay - Thrive Development Forum are essentially the various forms of mouths that are present in most macroscopic animals. The focus of progression and creativity in mouth “parts” would not be including as many different types of mouth as possible, but instead making those existing mouths have as diverse customization, shape, and function as possible.

That’s also something I’d imagine to be more relevant to internal organs rather than the external editor. Integrating this level of editing would be really cool, but it has to be done in a way that doesn’t feel unnecessarily convoluted, jammed in, or cluttered; the variety of organelles and structures a cell living in a macroscopic organism has is absolutely stunning and detailed in comparison to a free-living, unicellular organism.

I think this is a very nuanced, complex, and unique adaptation which is really rare in the animal kingdom, so it might not get such a dedicated mechanic in the macroscopic stage. I can imagine some sort of gameplay bonus to animals with thin enough skin, where they can integrate consumed algae or microbes into their metabolism and alter their underlying diet (seen in certain anemones and other sessile organisms). Even that is a very niche thing, and might not take priority.

5 Likes
11

Sorry for not posting, I was visiting my grandparents. Anyways, quadroderm creatures. The tissues possible would be real exotic and cool!

4 Likes
12

I hope you had a good time!

What exotic tissue are you expecting from this?

1 Like
13

Magnetic tissues that generate magnetic fields to make your organism go to speeds that give even Sonic a run for his money. As well as some fire-making tissues for dragons and the sort.

2 Likes
14

What exactly is a quadroderm? Can’t really find much information online

2 Likes
15

A creature with 4 germ layers, basically. The reason you don’t find much information is because I made up the name.

5 Likes
16

Aah, okay I understand better now!

Germ layers was something I tried to focus on years ago as a potential way to limit progression in the macroscopic stage, but the development team ultimately decided that germ layers should probably just be implied in normal progression as opposed to being an explicit feature.

Opportunities to implement more exotic, sci-fi esque abilities could present themselves in non-LAWK, but the initial priority would definitely be LAWK features.

6 Likes
17

Yeah, that could be best kept in non-LAWK.

1 Like
18

How should certain “uncorfirmed” LAWK features be handled? I recall there was a suspected largest titanosaur fossil in existance but it got lost. Would making organisms using similar biology that big be considered lawk or not?

1 Like
19

I am curious to know how placement of cell organelle in multicellular will effect your organisms starting macroscopic shape and function. Would placement of cilia, flagella, or pili effect appendages, limbs, or jaws in an way, or would the point be to eventually replace your microscopic organelle with better macroscopic variants? Also, will your membranes effect what macroscopic appendage, limb, or jaw options are available to your organism, and, if so, how might having a mixed selection of membranes be handled?

1 Like
20

Cilia (as Flagella aren’t so popular with eukaryotes) are used by comb jellies to move around, but it’s very slow. They also exist in the respiratory system for air filtration. As to pili, not sure many macroscopic organisms exist that possess them.

2 Likes