Jump to content
  • Advertisement


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

517 Good

About Diodor

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Diodor

    Black Holes(????????)

    Quote:Original post by szecs Quote:Original post by Diodor Quote:Original post by owl Well, as I see it, that's exactly what makes them bullshit. Or religion... If I kick your behind real hard, would you be consistent and not believe I did that because you didn't see it? We shouldn't take this thread to philosophy I think. anyway, I bet Owl meant "sensing, getting information" when he said "seeing".You can't see black holes by definition but obviously you can see what massive objects like them do to surrounding objects. [1]
  2. Diodor

    Black Holes(????????)

    Quote:Original post by owl Well, as I see it, that's exactly what makes them bullshit. Or religion... If I kick your behind real hard, would you be consistent and not believe I did that because you didn't see it?
  3. Diodor

    Anyone seen Inception yet?

    Loved this film to death. I think the "all a dream?" question is Nolan pulling the same inception trick on us that Cobb pulled on Mal, using the top pretty much in the same way. It's clever, it works, and it works just as inception is described in the film. We think it's our idea, but it's 100% engineered, planted. I dismiss the "all a dream" theory simply on its suckiness and lameness (and the kids in the final scene being played by different actors and wearing similar but different clothes from the ones in the memory is really strong proof as well). Secondly, I think it is required that Cobb be a mark of inception. What he goes through so closely matches the description of what Fischer goes through (catharsis) it simply has got to be inception. How Cobb's inception was done and by whom seems to me the real question of the film. I think it has to be just Ariadne. There's the Penrose scene with just Arthur and Ariadne which would not exist if all characters were simply plotting to fix Cobb, and there's the Fischer hospital level scene which also does nothing for Cobb who's not there to witness it. Besides, the Fischer arc is extremely well done and I won't stand for it to be not real or not relevant in itself. I think Ariadne stole more than she lets on from sharing Cobb's memory dungeon dream - the film is ambiguous on how architects teach their designs to the dreamers, but I think it has to be through shared dreaming automatically uploading the whole level - and she does see the "train" memory which is set in the limbo world Cobb and Mal built - so she could have at least some general idea of the layout. I think she put the train in the first dream level on purpose, and the same for the kids / broken glass Cobb sees in level two, both to convince Cobb he has to confront Mal and forgive himself or never see his kids again. Cobb was damaged goods but he definitely wasn't such a trainwreck as to bring unsolicited trains on level 1 of a dream - yes, Mal showed up on level two in the Saito dream at the start, but that was it. I think when Cobb and Ariadne use the dream machine on the hospital level they don't go to limbo but to a level 4 dream - Ariadne's recreation of Cob&Mal's limbo world - she being the dreamer. This explains how Cobb is young and Saito is old when Cobb gets thrown in limbo: he doesn't take the kick from Ariadne's dream, but he does drown in the van in the level 1 dream, and only then he gets to limbo, which by now is Saito's world. It takes maybe 5 minutes for Cobb to drown, which accounts for Saito's growing old (we don't know how fast limbo time is compared to level 1 time - Yusuf says it might be decades, it might be infinity, and Cobb's experience there doesn't really measure it). To tie the loose ends in my theory, the Mal we see on the hospital level needs not be Cobb's projection but may be an automaton Ariadne designed into the level. We don't know that fake Mal's gun in that level is a real gun and actually kills Fischer (it may be it just stuns him unconscious), and the defibrilator is also designed by Mal and may undo the stun effect, and possibly affect Ariadne who's dreaming nearby in unknown ways - the physics of the hospital level after all are still designed by her. Fischer and Mal on the fourth level may both be Cobb's projections. Eames may or may not be in on Ariadne's plan. Cobb's descending into limbo to rescue Saito wasn't planned by Ariadne, but if everything had gone according to her plan that wouldn't have been necessary.
  4. Diodor

    What's the best weapon in a Zombie Outbreak?

    Quote:Original post by Sirisian Quote:Original post by Diodor Your teeth, for obvious reasons.heh. That's a good way to get shot. "Look that zombie is biting that other zombie!" Why bite a zombie? They're not the ones trying to kill you, and they're not the ones with the tasty, tasty brains!
  5. Diodor

    What's the best weapon in a Zombie Outbreak?

    Your teeth, for obvious reasons.
  6. Diodor

    Why is Go around?

    Quote:Original post by LessBread Whatever works for you is fine with me but why did he have to name it Go and confuse it with Go? It's a great name for a major language but a terrible one for a niche/minor language, kind of like Java.
  7. Show both, color code items you can't equip yet.
  8. Diodor

    What Creates A World?

    The key word I think is consistency. The rules that govern the world must apply to player entities and non-player entities equally, at all times, without exception, regardless of whether the player is observing or not. Also, there must be nothing in the game that is not a subject to or a consequence of the rules - no silly plots and cutscenes and dialogue and quests and back story that use any _word_ that the game world doesn't fully understand. Quote:He stands at the Citadel of Shimeril, looking Norhtwest to the Plains of Blood. It is dawn and Shimeril is slightly tired. The Ice Fear is very mild. Shimeril is very bold. The Lord of Shimeril commands one thousand warriors and eight hundred riders. His warriors are invigorated. His riders are invigorated. Game worlds must perforce be highly abstract, and the level of abstraction must be consistent throughout. One should refrain from adding detail unless willing to add details with the same "zoom" level everywhere else in the game. A decision to add such an insane level of detail as a 3D environment virtually guarantees the result will not be a world - all the other elements of the game cannot possibly keep up and the result is a stage with props on it.
  9. Diodor

    Math Contest - am I overestimating people?

    Quote:Original post by BeerNutts If it's 1 day old, and you attack warehouse 1, there's a 1/30 chance you're right since a day old bottle could be in ANY of the warehouse. That is wrong. A 1 day old bottle _could_ be from any of the warehouses, but the probability for it to be from each of the warehouses is different. In fact it is 30 times more likely for it to be from warehouse 1 than from warehouse 30. Quote:A 30 day old bottle, however, can only be in warehouse #30, and you would attack warehouse #30, and be right 100% of the time. Correct. Quote:If it's 29 days old, you attack #29, and have 1/2 chance it's right. Wrong again. A 29 days old bottle is slightly more likely to come from warehouse 29 than from warehouse 30 so our chance to be correct is better than 1/2. Quote:You got that backwards friend. Note that while what you said was wrong, it didn't actually contradict anything I said. [edit] Also the chance for us to get a bottle n days old is not the same for every n - it is much more likely for us to get a 1 day old bottle than a 30 days old bottle. That's why you have to break up the problem by the warehouse - the likelihood for each of the warehouses to mask the missiles is equal. [Edited by - Diodor on July 8, 2010 3:13:43 PM]
  10. Diodor

    Math Contest - am I overestimating people?

    Yep, 13.3166238%. We always attack the warehouse with the highest concentration of bottles produced in the same day as our bottle. So if we get a 1 day old bottle we attack the #1 warehouse (which only has 1 day old bottles). If we get a 2 days old bottle we go to warehouse #2 and so on. If the missiles are in warehouse 1 we are 100% likely to get a bottle 1 day old so we always go to the correct place. If the missiles are in warehouse 2 the bottle may be 1 day or two days old so we have a 50% chance of getting it right, and so on for the other warehouses, the chance for the bottle to correctly indicate the warehouse is 1/3, 1/4 ... to 1/30. The answer then is (1/1 + .. + 1/30) / 30.
  11. Diodor

    World Cup 2010

    First the US wins against England 1:1 and now ties Slovenia 3:2.
  12. Since Pong computer games are about controlling automated entities. That's the essence, so games must be a bit of a waste of time because controlling little robots that don't even exist is not really about people. At best computer game entities are caricatures of people so computer games can reach their high point as comedy (the Sims, Carmageddon). A few games _are_ about people. Chess isn't really, but some chess notions can be used as metaphors in stories about people, so it gets a pass. Diplomacy and Poker are based on mathematical, non-human gameplay, but to play those games well one has to understand what the opponents are thinking, what their emotional state is, how they think we are thinking, how they perceive our emotional state, and how to manipulate those into attaining our goals. Diplomacy and Poker can be played online, but they aren't essentially computer games. They're about people interacting to each other through the game, not about interacting with the game world as such. This is why articles on Diplomacy strategy have been highly enjoyable for me, even though I've never played a single game, nor do I understand the game's basic rules completely. Contrast this with film. Film is all about the act of watching. The essence of film is central to human existence. Camera movement instantly creates mood, emotion, it talks. Now films also have superflous irrelevant story that isn't about what film is about, that is, visual vocabulary, but the smart director is usually free to take the formulaic crap execs are pushing on him and make the camera dance nonetheless. All this puts the game industry in a bind. Their business model has to be about selling the same gameplay over and over dressed in different "content". They have to be desperate about emulating the film industry, because the proper way to play is to learn just one game, say Diplomacy, use just one software client, and persuade, lie to, flatter, backstab, console, bully your fellow players for the rest of your free time allotted to playing.
  13. Diodor

    Why is World of Warcraft so popular?

    It's popular because it's good and it's extremely popular because it's popular.
  14. Diodor

    Giving Players Option To Rename PCG

    Quote:Original post by theOcelot Sounds fine to me, especially if I'm the discoverer of the planet. People who don't want to change the names can just... not. If you hide it right, most people will go blissfully unaware of the feature's existence. Edit box with default random generated name is fine.
  15. Diodor

    Giving Players Option To Rename PCG

    Wouldn't that violate the prime directive? Citizens of Arse probably have a long and proud tradition and wouldn't take any smart-ass puns regarding their home's name kindly. If your home planet's name referred to some amusing part of alien anatomy in some martian tongue would you agree to change it? Also, lol @ Uranus. There is a serious issue here. That names _matter_ any one who's read Tolkien or browsed through a Royal Navy list of ships knows. I can't think of any games that shine in this regard other than the ancient Lords of Midnight. Names in a procedurally generated game seem doomed to be arbitrary and meaningless - and whatever meaning attaches to a name would be lost when starting the game over. I've never derived satisfaction from being able to name game entities, chiefly from being unable to come up with ones I felt appropriate, and doubly so in single player games because the game world cannot react in any way to the name. Perhaps the game should automatically choose names according to the virtues and flaws of a place / character / ship, or else with the mood and fortunes of the parents / colonizers / builders of the named entity (Turin's older sister is named Lalaith - laughter; but the younger Nienor - mourning, following "the battle of unnumbered tears"). An entity's name could also change or be appended with an honorary title if it undergoes an extraordinary event. Alternatively the player could be able to select from a list of names, and the choice of name would affect appropriate attributes of the entity bearing it (some name may boost luck - some may instill a greater sense of duty or courage, etc.). If names can change attributes, a neutral name may also acquire positive / negative bonuses if an entity bearing it distinguishes itself one way or the other.
  • Advertisement

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

GameDev.net is your game development community. Create an account for your GameDev Portfolio and participate in the largest developer community in the games industry.

Sign me up!