Message from discussion 7DRL: Bob and Trev: Resurrection

Path: g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!zen.net.uk!demorgan.zen.co.uk!feeder.news.heanet.ie!news.indigo.ie!not-for-mail
From: Gerry Quinn <ger...@DELETETHISindigo.ie>
Newsgroups: rec.games.roguelike.development
Subject: Re: 7DRL: Bob and Trev: Resurrection
Message-ID: <MPG.20491aa23c79944f98b4d0@news1.eircom.net>
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> <1172240450.572579.253880@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Organization: Bindweed Entertainment Software
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: MicroPlanet-Gravity/2.60.2060
Lines: 45
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 15:37:39 -0000
NNTP-Posting-Host: 86.40.96.80
X-Complaints-To: abuse@eircom.net
X-Trace: news.indigo.ie 1172245060 86.40.96.80 (Fri, 23 Feb 2007 15:37:40 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 15:37:40 GMT

In article <1172240450.572579.253...@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, 
Phlamethro...@gmail.com says...
> 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.

You're in a skyscraper and the elevator only goes up.

You're in a cave and have to jump down a hole to the next level.

The portal to the next level requires passing through an event horizon.

> 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.

In a (never completed) project a long time ago, I saved the seed for 
each level, plus a list of the ten most important/valuable items.  
Other items just had their value added up, and items of that value 
would be generated randomly on re-entry.  The saved items would 
persist.

- Gerry Quinn