Back to General and Gameplay Programming

Very Large World

flying starfish · 2004-05-27T06:54:38

I''ve started doing some preliminary helper coding on a new game engine as a hobby project I''ve been throwing around in my head. My basic idea is as follows: The premise of the game will be that it is set thousands of years in the future on a desolate Earth, so the basic lay of the land is still there but the cities and infrastructure are gone (i.e. lots of natural environments about). My idea is that the player will in some way explore the world about them, which would encompass the entire Earth and dynamically generated ruins etc. What I want to do is use general contour maps of most parts of the Earth and then use random terrain generation to make up the details of areas, as well as some random generation algorithms to place most details and general NPC''s. Specific areas would be defined and then the random terrain would generate out from their edges based on a general set of rules for the surrounding area (i.e. greenery, wasteland etc.) Does anyone have any commentary on how possible this would be to do (bearing in mind many aspects of it are ideas of how general I want the implementation to be). As far as I can tell, most of the problems with the idea are quite solvable (i.e. how to ensure areas stay the same - save them and let them slowly degrade the longer the player is away from them till their wiped clean and due for a refresh). So yeah, what do you all think ? Is this idea feasible / decent frame rateable ? What pitfalls / issues should I be thinking about in implementation? ---- flying starfish

General and Gameplay Programming Programming

Started by flying starfish May 26, 2004 06:45 AM

9 comments, last by flying starfish 19 years, 11 months ago

RuneLancer

253

May 27, 2004 06:54 AM

quote:
1. compression, so 510 terabytes would be a lot less... still not usefull to put on a DVD and ship to some stores

2. A large part of earth is covered with.... water! do not store that on disk!!!

1. Even with massive compression in the ranks of, say, 99%, you still end up with 5.1 terabytes. Mind you, we''re talking about pretty dang good compression here. 70% would be more like it, but you gotta figure someone would use a custom algorithm made to take advantage of a single, known set of data, anyways.

2. Two thirds. A third of 5.1 terabytes is 1.7 TB.

Even with EXTREMELY optimistic compression rates, this would never fit on a DVD.

Very Large World

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

Very Large World

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

Reticulating splines