this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2025
166 points (100.0% liked)

Games

36667 readers
731 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here and here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 71 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (14 children)

"Now, I understand why so few companies have attempted to develop a life simulation game. The challenge isn't just additive the more you try to build—it's exponential. At a certain point, finding bugs in this vast world we've created feels like playing tag with invisible ghosts."

He's not bragging; it's honesty. I'm thankful he is sharing the experience. I know totally what he's talking about. I remember trying to make a simulation of reality in the wc3 map editor in elementary school. Add the weather so the plants grow. Tie growth variables also in to deer eating them. wolves eat the deer. So everything needs hunger variables. But already we start having the 'exponential growth' he is talking about: because what about the Weather and the Deer? And the Weather and Wolves? Add aspect of the world for one type of object (weather for plants), and suddenly you have to figure out how or whether it relates to everything else you have (Deer and Wolves). Now let's say we add villagers and Structures. Every time we add something, we have more nodes to consider the interrelations of.

It's easy when there are few systems and few types of things (like a cardgame of creatures with atk and def), but it escalates quick and does exactly what he's saying the more systems you try to accurately include and farther toward 'full life sim'.

So im just a noob, but I see clearly this is what he is conveying to us. (probably cuz i tried a similar path in elementary school. if i remember correctly i ran in to this same issue, scale was too big too big project and i switched to something else. it exponentialed quick; just like he says)

edit: i bet he wasnt brave as much as did not forsee the exponentialness aspect and wanting to aim high caused him to fall in to it

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Making a system like this one day is my dream. I'm not in game dev and I'm probably never going to make a playable game but I naively believe that if you organize this well enough in advance, the moment it starts clicking together would be amazing. If you define all the individual actors in a flexible enough way, eventually the simulation should just 'click' and start functioning on its own, right? :P

For example, you dont need to code the specific wolves+rain interaction - you just need to code "if vulnerable/tired - find shelter" and have rain affect the living creatures in that way. It doesn't matter if there are deer or sheep in the area, "if wolf hungry" logic should just say "find something with meat to eat nearby".

Then again I know enough about programming to know this is extremely naive and it'd probably be a million times more difficult if I ever got around to doing it. I don't even know where I fall on the dunner-kruger graph yet, but it's an interesting thing to think about for me.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

This video series sounds like it might be up your alley. Guy documents his attempts to simulate a goblin society and ecosystem.

load more comments (12 replies)