nm

So you're actively blocking out useful critics and feedback? Thats sad.
Surely this sounds like an ambitions project, and i wouldn't know how this could work at all, but being a coder, not a designer, i wouldn't know anything about algorithms and stuff.

I wish you good look on your endeavour.

_________________
Long pork is people!

wzl's burrow

My interest is peaked..



..my question is.. "how" ? If I understand correctly, you've already thought out in your head an algorithm that can achieve these results, your barrier is simply that your not familiar with coding itself? Sounds to me like your'e past the hard part. Learning a language to put your algorithm to use would be the easy part. I'm also surprised your sharing this, if you have that math in your head, you could probably sell it for a considerable chunk of cash.

Regardless, it does sound very interesting. Going from "pseudocode" to actual code is nothing. PM me with more info. Thanks for posting!

_________________
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free."
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society."
"Hope is the first step on the road to dissapointment." -Jonah Orion
http://tankzgame.blogspot.com

Ehhh... what? *scratches head*

_________________
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free."
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society."
"Hope is the first step on the road to dissapointment." -Jonah Orion
http://tankzgame.blogspot.com

I believe that was what you might call, "prickly sarcasm."


I have something for you to consider below. Don't take it as negative pessimism; rather, a bit of constructive criticism.



"Requires less memory and achieves better results." Thing is, with any algorithm, there is a major trade-off between CPU cycles and memory. If you shove all the data into memory, the CPU will have less to stress over... if you yank everything out of memory, the CPU does all the work.

Everything you describe is certainly possible, but is merely a case of making the CPU do all the work... and I think even today's bleeding-edge processors would have a hard time accomplishing all your goals at anywhere near an acceptably "real-time" rate of speed.

If you have devised some idea as to how to alleviate this issue, then I'm sure we'd *all* be anxious for you to tell us. If you haven't yet thought into that detail, I believe it would be of benefit to you to strongly consider the implications of your method.

_________________
What most people don't understand about "enlightenment" is that it is not an end-goal; but where you find yourself just before taking a new "first step."

*sigh*

Listen folks. I appreciate all that you've said, and I don't mean the following in an acrimonious way.

Don't you think I've thought about all of that before I posted this? Do you think that by saying some of the above in the post I'm "blocking out useful criticism"? This is exactly what I'm trying to avoid; I already spent time in the post saying that I have things planned and I'm simply looking for volunteers to join an open source team, not say things like that.

As well, if it was proper to put a massive chunk of description on here, I'd do that. That's the point; if you're interested, I'll go into detail. If anyone actually chooses to come onboard, then I'll be leading "teaching" sessions through the site and perhaps email. The main reason I'm looking for help is that it'd be more streamlined for me to explain the philosophy and flow of the algorithm set and have others more acquainted with things like Unity "speak forth" the concepts into raw code and slot them into the appropriate points in Unity or OpenGL code. You know, like a head leading a body; the head can do a lot of things, but it's a lot more fluid to have arms and legs and hands and feet to help out. We all benefit. No cost is entailed; if it ends up being junk, the worst that could happen is that you spent a small amount of time reading some emails and thinking of new avenues of procedural generation. I'm only looking for about 10 people. It will work, I'll tell you that. Obviously, one would say "well prove it". All I can say is, if you have some faith, come onboard and I'll indeed prove it.

Also, I've been told that ideas are a "dime a dozen" elsewhere, and the gaming community at large doesn't seem all that eager to buy ideas from a non-established fellow.

At any rate, perhaps I should just do it myself. I'll have to rethink all of this, lol.

You are making very big claims, like
People have looked at AI improvements and all other things you mention for the past 50 years or so, which makes it very unlikely that you have that one idea that everybody else missed. The fact that it gives so many advances in so many areas makes it even less likely, as that's what everybody is looking for, in all those areas.

You are not telling how exactly you are aiming to achieve this world wonder, so I have no means to judge the feasibility of it.
I don't know about you, but I don't commit myself to anything until I understand what I am signing for.
You are already sold to the idea, but in order to get volunteers you have to convince them first. Promising great riches is not the driving force in that case, explaining how exactly it works is.

At the moment, I think it is a very safe bet that your idea will not survive the first feasibility study.
Of course, I could be wrong. Until you disclose your ideas in more detail, I have no way of knowing.

Alberth

_________________
My project: Messing about in FreeRCT, dev blog, and IRC #freerct at oftc.net

It is not about that. It's the fact that, actually, there is no detail about the project, just what you intend to do. Furthermore, many of these process, like texturing and lighting, are dependent on a graphic API. So, it would be necessary study hardwares and create a new graphic API.

A.I. is already an advanced area, the matter is that hardwares are not so advanced. And incredible A.I. requires incredible computers.


Behind all small code there is a large amount of code. Inside a procedure like "Init_program()" a lot of process are made, and, the faster is to do something through an API, means that it[API] is even more limited.

_________________
"Life finds a way." - Ian Malcolm
My WebBlog: PixelDeveloper
English is not my native language, so excuse me for any writing mistakes.

I think the concern we have mostly stems from this proposal following a certain established pattern -- a pattern along the lines of:

Eric gets a great idea sure to change the way people think about dining utensils.
Eric, for whatever reason, needs help in realizing his ambition.
Eric goes into a forum focusing on dining utensils seeking help.
Eric posts about how his idea will revolutionize dining utensils with a marketing-style feature list.
The other forum users see certain features in the list that may directly conflict with one or more of the other features.
Eric is asked how -- despite a perceived lack of experience and a complete departure from what is known to work -- he came about his "formula."
Moment of truth ensues: Eric either reveals, to some extent, details of his plan and proves himself; or, Eric is another name buried in a long list of dining utensil designers who may (or may not) have a brilliant idea, but is ignored due to the perception that he has bitten off more than he can chew.

Honestly, it's nothing personal -- we've seen ideas *just* like yours before. While I'm not going to say, either way, whether your idea is good or not, you haven't given us any real, solid information with which to judge the viability of such an idea. All we have is what you've given us -- and, unfortunately, a few of these major features are in direct conflict with one another, which raises any number of red flags to any potential partners who may actually have some experience with this sort of subject.

Either way, one of two things will happen beyond this point: You can give us *real* data on HOW you plan to make these features work together, and people may get interested. Or -- you can withhold that information and turn this entire conversation into a frustrating endeavor in trying to walk up the side of the Empire State Building... In which case, you will find it that much more difficult to find *anyone* willing to devote any time or interest in your project.



We don't need a "massive chunk of description" -- we just need to know a little more about the logic you are using, as some of the major features listed with regard to your idea are in direct conflict with others. If you can even *begin* to explain how you've resolved those conflicts, it would go a long way toward getting people inclined to come on-board -- something they will not do unless they are interested. The problem is, the level of detail presented here is actually more likely to deter experienced, competent developers from signing up, and will instead only manage to attract those with little knowledge in the field.



All I'm saying is that if you want a certain quality of partners -- those who could actually help you, more than hinder you -- what you've given us so far leaves much to be desired, and far too much to the imagination. You would have a lot more of these kinds of people *choosing* to come onboard if they could get a handle of *how* you plan on tackling the problems presented.



This is the problem -- people have their own ideas of things they want to work on for their own benefit. They are, by nature, less inclined to work on the ideas of others unless they find a sufficient perk-factor involved. Then, couple that with the fact that there are lots of underdeveloped, poorly explained, and fundamentally weak ideas out there be peddled by those who haven't previously had their nose nearly taken off by a grindstone, you end up with a saying like "ideas are a dime a dozen" that pretty much accurately describes the situation.

It's not that you're "non-established" in the sense that you aren't in some secret, private club that operates within the underground. You are, however, "non-established" in the sense that you have not yet given us *anything* meaningful on which to begin deciding whether you are:
A genius with a brilliant idea;
or simply yet another chucklehead who saw a cool idea on TV and wants someone else to do something similar for him so he can get rich;
or something in-between.

We aren't ignoring your concerns; we're simply voicing ours.

_________________
What most people don't understand about "enlightenment" is that it is not an end-goal; but where you find yourself just before taking a new "first step."

Such a wonderful post! (I have lots to learn :) )

_________________
My project: Messing about in FreeRCT, dev blog, and IRC #freerct at oftc.net

...regardless, I'm personally still interested in hearing more details. As I understand it, he's not coming here looking for help working out some miracle algorithm. My understanding is that he has already worked it out and he's fairly confident that it works. His obstacle is his lack of programming knowledge to translate his idea into actual code.

I don't know this person, so I can't validate any of his claims.. but listen to what he says he has. It sounds too important to dismiss without further investigation.

That's just me, though.

_________________
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free."
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society."
"Hope is the first step on the road to dissapointment." -Jonah Orion
http://tankzgame.blogspot.com

I agree with you completely! If I came off as dismissive, it certainly was not my intention. I was merely explaining the differences between his view, and our view, of this matter.

My intent is to get Gnarlyman to give us a little more to go on -- I too am interested in what he has to say. I'm merely attempting (in my, as usual, likely flawed manner) to explain that while we are interested in hearing him out, we (or I, at the least) are instinctively cautious about the *claims* made about the idea -- not necessarily the idea itself.

_________________
What most people don't understand about "enlightenment" is that it is not an end-goal; but where you find yourself just before taking a new "first step."

Yes, you're exactly right. I anticipated all this stuff being said in reply to my post, and I tried my best to cover the bases to avoid what amounts to wastes of time on the parts of the people saying it and me in reading it. I'm not trying to come across in a stilted way here, but there's not much more I can say without wielding a bit of a gentle hammer to repeated and unnecessary corrections.

At any rate, the main reason I haven't put the details here is that I wanted to keep such descriptions closed to the actual project. I'd like to go ahead and spill much more here, but I've a desire to keep it a bit more exclusive than spilling a hard-fought piece of work of mine all over forums. I'm a bit nervous about that. I'd still like to keep it a but more confined at this point. Suffice to say that it unites all elements of game architecture into a single pattern that is repeated over and over again in different contexts.

What Meneliki said ("My understanding is that he has already worked it out and he's fairly confident that it works. His obstacle is his lack of programming knowledge to translate his idea into actual code") is exactly the reason why I'm going around to game development forums such as this one. My background is in science, math, philosophy, and economics, and the algorithm was developed as much around philosophical inspiration as it was on the Einstein Field Equation (which it is derived from). It would be much more streamlined for me to A)lead the teaching of the algorithm, both as a whole and as it pertains to each facet of game architecture, B)provide very general code prototypes for each element, and C)lead a bunch of "hands and feet" that can perform various coding functions and translate it from me to Unity, OpenGL, or whatever is best. For instance, if I'm teaching part of the algorithm structure that relates to game menus, I don't exactly know what part of the specific Unity scripting backside, classes, etc. I would need to go to. BUT, I have an excellent and firm grasp on game architecture as a whole, so conceptually, I understand everything as well as anyone else. But the specifics are things I do not know very well.

At any rate, I'm trying to get about 10 people interested. I have one other fellow thus far from another forum (dreamincode.net), and perhaps 2 here. So, 3 total, perhaps... If I can get even a small and skilled team assembled, the actual coding should take a relatively small amount of time. I don't anticipate a lot of time at all, really.

Listen:
If I can get 5-10 people (who know their stuff well) interested, I'll start a round of teaching emails, at which time they can see the gist of it. It'll probably take 3-5 good-sized email "lessons" to get the flow of it, but if those 5-10 people are willing to survive that, I have perfect confidence that it'll take off like a rocket from there. I'm having trouble getting people interested, for all of the reasons, evidently, that people have been throwing around above here. Not much I can do about that, really. At any rate, whoever's interested, and perhaps can spread a small spot of word-of-mouth to get the tally to 5-10...well, I'll just be waiting. Like I said, it's not like anyone's losing anything here. Heck, I'm even making my baby more or less open source. Anyways, later.

@Gnarlyman:

For what it may be worth, are you familiar with the principles behind "The Cathedral and the Bazaar?" If not, the basic gist of one of its lessons is:

People need a foundation to reach a long-term, challenging goal. This holds true in any situation -- if you are are a comic book author and want to get published, you need to send samples/portfolios/resumes of significant substance to the publisher (in many cases, several publishers, if you truly wish to get published). The reason comic book publishers may be hesitant to give this up-and-coming author a chance is due simply to the fact that they must have "something to work with." If any of the following issues are present:

* The author does not present enough information to establish his style and skill to the publisher
* The author is determined by the publisher to not possess the right style, or adequate skill
* The author shows great potential, but has not yet adequately reined control over that potential

Then the likelihood of the publisher not instantly chucking the author's proposal into the trash is severely diminished. It isn't a reflection of the potential of the author, but a reflection of the needs the publisher is trying to meet for himself. If the publisher finds that the author does not meet his needs, he cannot spend all his time teaching, training, or otherwise holding the hand of the author.

In this situation, the author has a choice: To build a better foundation, whether by bulking his portfolio up, practicing and learning techniques, pushing himself to become better, or any combination of these... Or, keep sending out his pitches to publishers who aren't interested, and will not be interested unless and until the author adequately meets their requirements.

Until there is a foundation for the comic author, there is no foundation for the publisher. The publisher knows, however, that there *are* other sources of a foundation. Thus, he will seek out the people with the strongest foundations, and forget about the rest.

Your situation is similar: You have an idea. This makes you an author. You are out sending your pitch to people who can potentially make it happen -- making them publishers. The publishers here are no different from the publishers in the comic book example -- they are not opposed to giving you a chance. But, until you have some way of proving to them that you have a solid foundation with which they can work, publishers are not going to be interested in making your idea happen.

It's not because of a bad idea -- your idea can be a stroke of unadulterated genius. But if your target audience doesn't "get it," then they will pass you by simply because they have finite time which they can apply to an infinite number of activities.

This is why I, in particular, am still continuing this conversation. I am interested in helping you. Your idea is one thing, but I want to help *you* specifically. I see you becoming frustrated, and all I want to do is help you find out why so that you can "fix" this issue, take control of this situation, and change the direction in which it has traveled prior to this point. This conversation between you and me is not about helping you realize your idea -- it is about helping you finding a more effective approach to pitching your idea.

In any case, don't sit there and wait patiently for ten people to come along before you start working on realizing your idea -- start on it now. I understand programming isn't your field, but don't let that stop you -- work on the rest until you reach the inevitable brick wall between your abilities and fields in which you are inexperienced... and then you will have options: If you have your idea in solid, concrete terms, present them to potentially interested parties and see who bites. If no one (or not enough people) comes along to help you, then you still have options: Use the free time you have since you finished work on one foundation to start building a new foundation to add onto the other(s).

You may pleasantly surprise yourself as to what you are capable of. Ten years ago, I had just started programming games. Graphic design was certainly not a skill I had much of a handle on. I knew *nothing* about music. My writing skills were sloppy. But I was dead-set on building a computer role-playing game.

And you know what -- that RPG I wanted to build never got built. And it's a good thing, because my horizons expanded, and I had attained a far better grasp upon what I *really* wanted. In addition, not only have I become a better programmer, but I can actually get hired to do artwork (people have paid me several hundred dollars US for relatively "minor" work). I have learned enough about music to produce tunes that are passable (I have only been at the music part a couple of years -- and I don't dedicate *that* much time to it, so while my musical works are by no means fantastic, they can be considered passable). My story-writing skills have become more keen by leaps and bounds, as I have spent much time refining my technique and style.

So, don't let a bunch of naysayers discourage you in the least. If you have a dream, the only one who can realize it in the end is YOU. If people find enough value in your cause to become involved, that is a great feeling. But if you have to do it all by yourself, then hey -- at least when you get there, more glory for you.

_________________
What most people don't understand about "enlightenment" is that it is not an end-goal; but where you find yourself just before taking a new "first step."

What i am curious about is:
You say that the algorithm is already worked out, in a non programmatical way. That may very well be true, but you also say you don't know jack about programming, so how can you be sure it can be realized by a small team (that never worked together to begin with) within a relatively small amount of time (whatever that means, in my terms it's along a bunch of weeks to a few month).
You are uncertain about the tool-chain or technology to use (again a lack of knowledge in the programming department), you're not sure about what language to write in or what kind of versioning tool the project uses.

You mention using Unity or OpenGL in the same sentence. If you're really about tremendously improving performance it is unlikely that a premade engine will supply the low level API access you might need, thus creating a new render pipeline from scratch alone would take a couple of weeks to get working, not even mentioning all the functionality of your concepts.
You also mentioned procedurally built cities, with walkable interior complete with furniture. Who builds those assets or who creates the algorithms to produce them. Again, with conjunction with your afore mentioned small amount of time this sounds more and more like a marketing pitch instead of a well thought-out project concept.

Let me ask you something: have you yet spoken to people in the graphics programming field about your concrete ideas and algorithms and get their opinion about it's feasability?

Just to make this clear I'd love to see you succeed, i really do. This sounds like a great plan, and although i know nothing about Einstein's Field theory or what it entails i can only say "make it happen!". But i really have to stress the MilkBox' point about it:


Remember that you aren't paying salary (as far as i can tell), so this will be at best a part time project for the people you find(again a hint to reconsider the amount of time you were calculating for it). Also the problem with this is, that people don't get too attached to it and may drop out without mention, leaving your remaining team demotivated and prone to shatter. So you are the only person you really can trust to realize this for now.

Best of luck

_________________
Long pork is people!

wzl's burrow