Message from discussion
7DRL: Bob and Trev: Resurrection
Path: g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Phlamethro...@gmail.com
Newsgroups: rec.games.roguelike.development
Subject: Re: 7DRL: Bob and Trev: Resurrection
Date: 22 Feb 2007 08:14:38 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <1172160878.326908.147470@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>
References: <1172021941.913013.186770@v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>
<C3XCh.6614$Fg4.4195@newsfe5-win.ntli.net>
<1172141442.564917.67700@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>
<1172152191.506825.68910@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>
<0EE*0R2Dr@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.72.173.130
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1172160885 31169 127.0.0.1 (22 Feb 2007 16:14:45 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 16:14:45 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <0EE*0R2Dr@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>
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: m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com; posting-host=195.72.173.130;
posting-account=bDRC7A0AAACF2inNsTKqE7bM4XnetBGT
On 22 Feb, 14:42, David Damerell <damer...@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
wrote:
> Quoting <Phlamethro...@gmail.com>:
>
> >On 22 Feb, 10:50, henrih...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>Just a suggestion: Given the severe limitations, I feel it is
> >>justified to create non-persistent levels, and instead focus on
> >>generating particularly good random levels.
> >I don't think development time saved by not having persistent levels
> >will allow me to develop a significantly better random level
> >generator.
>
> If levels can only be altered trivially - opening doors, etc - and you're
> not going to be walking round a skyscraper with digging tools - random
> seed plus diffs might be an efficient way to store persistent levels.
> --
> David Damerell <damer...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Distortion Field!
> Today is Leicesterday, February.
Actually, the main space waster in the proposed savefile format is the
object list. Each 40x22 dungeon can be stripped down to 660 bytes of
data, but unless I go for a more complex save format I'll also be
saving 202 objects, which are 8 bytes each. If on average each dungeon
level only contains 30 items, that'll be over half the save file
wasted with empty definitions.
If I have the time (or a really good idea) I'll go for a more complex
save format, but the limits of DFS, BASIC, and 32K of RAM will be
working against me. So for now I'm just sticking to storing a fixed
size block of data per level.