Map Randomization

[Slaughtersun]

I implore the developers to set up a procedural map generation similar to roguelike games (Nethack et al.) Another great example is Diablo.

Without multiplayer, this is the single element that will do the most for replayability. Diablo II is 15 years old this year and people are still playing it even today. Nethack is almost 30 years old and people are still playing that even though it doesn't even have any graphics! In fact, by raw numbers of players it is more popular than ever before!

Games with canned maps get stale after the first, or maybe the second, playthrough. You may think your game is different but it is not.

 

[Murf]

Weird, I have played for hundreds of hours, never get tired of the map. AI is random, content is random and the map is a setting within the larger Sui Generis. After level three the content will not be as 'linear' and you can pick which way you wish to go. Different for each person I suppose, but it continues to be replayable for me, spent 5 hours yesterday streaming it. I have never gotten the same game twice.

 

[Rod_Lightning]

I prefer a well designed map with a lot of thought put into it (which is the case here I feel) over procedural generated crap any day of the week.

 

[Slaughtersun]

Rod_Lightning, do you feel that Diablo II maps were crap?

Procedural generation doesn't need to be crap-- it's like anything else in that respect. Templatization, in other words rooms that are either hardcoded or themselves contain variation within specific parameters, goes a very long way toward keeping procedural maps interesting and fresh. They need to look like they were designed and built by humans, not just a random jumble.

I said this to Chris Taylor in around 2001 when he was making Dungeonsiege. He didn't listen. A game that should easily have been a Diablo II killer ended up being a one playthrough throwaway.

Canned content works when you have a game on the level of Skyrim with a team of hundreds of people. There is a ton of stuff in Skyrim that I know I haven't seen even though I played the game extensively.

For a dev studio that doesn't have that sort of content creation muscle, procedural generation is the answer and makes the difference between an early splash followed by a fizzle, and an early splash followed by a slow burn and long tail of sales that goes on for ten years or more.

Exploration is a HUGE aspect of any dungeon crawling game and games neglect it at their peril.

 

[Tony]

Rod_Lightning, do you feel that Diablo II maps were crap?

Procedural generation doesn't need to be crap-- it's like anything else in that respect. Templatization, in other words rooms that are either hardcoded or themselves contain variation within specific parameters, goes a very long way toward keeping procedural maps interesting and fresh. They need to look like they were designed and built by humans, not just a random jumble.

I said this to Chris Taylor in around 2001 when he was making Dungeonsiege. He didn't listen. A game that should easily have been a Diablo II killer ended up being a one playthrough throwaway.

Canned content works when you have a game on the level of Skyrim with a team of hundreds of people. There is a ton of stuff in Skyrim that I know I haven't seen even though I played the game extensively.

For a dev studio that doesn't have that sort of content creation muscle, procedural generation is the answer and makes the difference between an early splash followed by a fizzle, and an early splash followed by a slow burn and long tail of sales that goes on for ten years or more.

Exploration is a HUGE aspect of any dungeon crawling game and games neglect it at their peril.

Currently the map layouts in Exanima are part of the lore. It gives the player hints and clues and tells part of the story about what occurred in the underworld. This doesn't work so well if the map is randomly generated. There will be more non-linear content added after the portal. And there will be way, way more non-linear content in Sui Generis since it's an open world game where you can go anywhere and do anything (totally non-linear). Every time you play Sui Generis it will be impossible to have the exact same outcome every time due to so many dynamic things that will change depending on what occurs.

The devs very much dislike linear gameplay so I'm not in the least bit concerned about this aspect of gameplay.

 

[Slaughtersun]

I'm not so much concerned about Exanima which I am just fine with as an engine test. I am sort of unlikely even to play through the whole game, I'm just interested in the sword fighting. On the other hand I would be much more interested in the story part of the game if it had random map layouts!

Another option is a non-random "overworld" with a mix of procedural and non-procedural dungeons. Imagine if Skyrim had random dungeons to go along with the somewhat randomized quests! It might be a good thing that it doesn't, people would never stop playing...

 

[Tony]

I'm not so much concerned about Exanima which I am just fine with as an engine test. I am sort of unlikely even to play through the whole game, I'm just interested in the sword fighting. On the other hand I would be much more interested in the story part of the game if it had random map layouts!

Another option is a non-random "overworld" with a mix of procedural and non-procedural dungeons. Imagine if Skyrim had random dungeons to go along with the somewhat randomized quests! It might be a good thing that it doesn't, people would never stop playing...

While random maps work well in certain games that have a particular focus, in Exanima and SG everything is supposed to have a function and a purpose, including the map layout. In most games the layout is almost insignificant so randomization wouldn't be detrimental to gameplay; this is not the case with Exanima and SG. There is a certain depth that you just can't replicate with randomization.

What will keep gameplay fresh in Sui Generis is the dynamic event system. The game will not be player-centric like it is in Skyrim. Events will occur regardless of whether or not the player triggers them. The world will continually be in motion and NPC's will be taking part in events and triggering things just like the player can. Everyone can die in SG and no one is invincible for the sake of story progression. It will be impossible to have the same exact outcome twice in a row simply because there will be so many variables that will change in each playthrough.

Designing the game so the player is no more significant than any other NPC makes it so the game doesn't break if any one person dies, things will continue to progress regardless. No one character is essential for the game to continue. This is one part of SG that is truly revolutionary and it will allow almost limitless gameplay possibilities.

 

[Slaughtersun]

this is not the case with Exanima and SG. There is a certain depth that you just can't replicate with randomization.

How exactly? I do disagree-- I think that procedural maps can do just about anything you want them to do.

Again, some maps could be procedural and others not, offering the best of both worlds. Since you can have both, with procedural maps in addition to areas with whatever designed depth you might want, it's mathematically provable that the game would be deeper, since it would be "designed depth plus."

What will keep gameplay fresh in Sui Generis is the dynamic event system. The game will not be player-centric like it is in Skyrim. Events will occur regardless of whether or not the player triggers them. The world will continually be in motion and NPC's will be taking part in events and triggering things just like the player can. Everyone can die in SG and no one is invincible for the sake of story progression. It will be impossible to have the same exact outcome twice in a row simply because there will be so many variables that will change in each playthrough.

That's very interesting and I am eager to see how they do that. I can see how it might work. At the same time it's a rather huge demand for AI.

 

[Tony]

How exactly? I do disagree-- I think that procedural maps can do just about anything you want them to do.

Again, some maps could be procedural and others not, offering the best of both worlds. Since you can have both, with procedural maps in addition to areas with whatever designed depth you might want, it's mathematically provable that the game would be deeper, since it would be "designed depth plus."

If you've played the Exanima dungeon completely through and thoroughly explored it you should notice many, many details that are hand crafted and intentionally placed where they are. You'll find a corpse sitting at a desk next to a barricaded door with a note next to him mentioning some details that hint about what happened in said room. There are notes strategically placed that give hints about finding secret locations. The entire layout is setup in a way that makes it feel like a believable, real place that people actually lived in. Observing the layout tells you a lot about what previously occurred in the underworld; the lore and layout starts to paint a picture and you can almost recreate the steps of those who previously lived and died down there.

The main focus of Exanima and SG is to survive while discovering what is going on in the world around you while piecing together parts of the puzzle to form a complete picture. The devs have gone to great lengths to make everything have a function and a purpose, to not simply be random or insignificant. Randomization defeats this purpose.

 

[ZaratanCho]

I have yet to see a game with randomized levels/zones that comes anywhere near what handcrafted ones usually are. If you make procedural maps do everything you want them to do they won't really be procedural anymore, only have some minor variations that are not worth it. Bare mettle have created a really awesome tool for creating the underworld very fast, you can be sure they will make use of it instead of putting a lot of time in creating some weird randomization system that will most likely not fulfill their requirements.

 

[NachoDawg]

I think its a very deliberate choice to give us the players the same map to deal with. We can grow as a community while we solve the riddles of the world on this forum together.

 

[Zotis]

I still play comodore 64 games that don't have random map generators. Indy Heat 4 life bro!

 

[Faelivrin]

This same topic was brought to the steam forum earlier. Instead of random maps, i'd rather prefer devs release the creation engine so we can do our own levels.

 

[Vold]

Random maps do not intrest me much to be honest, it does not add much replayability to a game unless that it's a game about grinding, hacking and slashing (like diablo). Exanima will have other and more intresting features that will add replayability, for instance, complex AI (with behaviours, emotions, goals, etc), ''random'' loot, rich combat system that does not get old because it's amazing (and they have not even added additional combat moves, thaumaturgy, etc), secrets,.. And Sui Generis will take it to a next level adding Dynamic Story system and events which means something like a procedurally generated story, which in my opinion is superior to any other randomized factor that adds replayability.

 

[speculum]

Observing the layout tells you a lot about what previously occurred in the underworld; the lore and layout starts to paint a picture and you can almost recreate the steps of those who previously lived and died down there....

...The devs have gone to great lengths to make everything have a function and a purpose, to not simply be random or insignificant. Randomization defeats this purpose.

There are many games that have both random maps and designed ones which, as SlaughterSun mentioned, is a good way to allow devs to have tight control over the story they tell while simultaneously making it much more replayable. I don't think maps have to be exclusively one or the other and I honestly don't see how it would break the developer philosophy of designing a few important programs that have a wide range of applications rather than many many smaller ones (the emphasis on physics instead of canned animations being one such example). I think this was a topic when the kickstarter launched way back when too, but I forget what was said.

 

[Zotis]

Well, I wouldn't say a random dungeon generator is the most pressing concern for replayability. Certainly an editor so you can make your own would be better. That way people could download maps made by other people too. But a random generator as a side feature, kind of like arena, would be fun and would enhance replayability. So I feel like you deserve some credit Slaughterson.

Edit: I think it's also a matter of what the developers devote their finite time and limited resources to. I don't think a random map generator is worth not having what they could make instead.