7DRL: Bob and Trev: Resurrection - rec.games.roguelike.development

Message from discussion 7DRL: Bob and Trev: Resurrection
Path: g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Phlamethro...@gmail.com
Newsgroups: rec.games.roguelike.development
Subject: Re: 7DRL: Bob and Trev: Resurrection
Date: 23 Feb 2007 06:20:50 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <1172240450.572579.253880@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
References: <1172021941.913013.186770@v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>
   <1172160878.326908.147470@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>
   <lem*ms3Dr@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>
   <1172166162.759975.199160@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>
   <ngm*nG3Dr@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>
   <1172198220.404910.10580@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.72.173.130
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1172240456 21319 127.0.0.1 (23 Feb 2007 14:20:56 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 14:20:56 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <1172198220.404910.10580@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 1.1.4322),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=195.72.173.130;
   posting-account=bDRC7A0AAACF2inNsTKqE7bM4XnetBGT

On 23 Feb, 02:37, henrih...@gmail.com wrote:
> If you absolutely require persistent levels, I suggest the following:
> Store the random number seed of a level so you can remake it on
> the fly without having to actually store the result; and just let
> items
> get hoovered away from a level when you leave.

Thinking about it, I don't think there's much of an argument for why I
should have persistent items. Any monsters which are left alive could
either run off or follow the player to the new level, and any items
which are left behind have presumably been left because the player
doesn't want/need them. But at the same time, I can't think of any
reasons why I shouldn't have persistent levels and items. Having fully
persistent levels and items will certainly place some restrictions on
the game, but I'd rather try working within those restrictions only to
find it's impossible rather than take the easy route and throw all the
old data away without even trying.

If my ideas don't work - then fine, I'll start cutting them back. But
at least we'll have some concrete evidence of them not working,
instead of (what appears to me to be) a load of people running around
claiming the sky is falling :)

The whole idea of me writing it for a BBC is to find out exactly
what's possible within the limitations of the machine - so I'm going
to want to be pushing against and challenging those limits, not
running away from them.