Cities and very large maps

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

This post really has two questions in it:
* How can I generate realistic cities? (modern or slight future)
* Does anyone have experience of / information on very large maps in
roguelikes?
(These two ideas might actually come together in a game idea I am
fiddling with.)

Within cities (covering the whole map), I have had the idea of taking
the area, splitting it recursively into random rectangles down to some
size, (implemented) then filling the resulting rectangles with grids of
streets (not yet implemented).

For large maps, I am considering a simplified version of the system
described here:
http://www.drizzle.com/~scottb/gdc/continuous-world.htm
If I use their multiple-coordinate-systems system, then I will be able
to have maps which are non-euclidean (due to ancient magical /
technological history, or maybe the inside of a visiting TARDIS) or
infinite (or whole-planet, e.g. Coruscant), though a pair of 16-bit ints
for each co-ordinate would not be too much of a space-strain for me if I
were using Euclidean co-ordiantes (as opposed to the pair of 32- or
64-bit ints that Dungeon Siege would have needed). I could split the
map into chunks and only keep nearby or important chunks in memory at
one time. Some things could be re-generated each time using a seeded
RNG, as buildings will be (fairly) indestructible. The advantage of
only performing calculations for only a fraction of the map is increased
speed, and not having everything in the game either charge at you from
half-way across the city or run away before you every see it so you can
never catch it.

One problem plot-wise with cities is that you can explore in any
direction in a city, rather than starting at the top and working down as
in a dungeon, so it becomes hard to come up with a way of getting the
player to encounter easy enemies first, and harder ones later.
Obviously traditional rogue-player behaviour (slaughter) would cause
some alarm, and cause progressively stronger weapons/troops to be sent
in (only fun if you're Godzilla or similar), which might be able to
provide the required effect.

Some random mobile things you could encounter, from various possible
roguelikes set in modern cities (playing as e.g.: street-trader, pimp,
spy, rampaging monster, policeman ("cop" for you Americans), etc.):
* child, youth, (young/old) woman, (young/old) man
* car, van, SUV, motorbike, lorry,
* fireman, fire truck, policeman, police car, medic/doctor, ambulance
* marine, sniper, tank, humvee, B52
* helicopter, news reporter, camera crew
* scientist, banker, shopkeeper, office worker, street performer,
street-cleaner (the person or the vehicle), driver, builder
* punk, mod, rocker
* whore, pimp, drug-dealer
* spy (once identified)
* cat, dog, rat, alligator (sewers), (various zoo animals)
Some of these were mentioned also in the cyberpunk posts, but cyberpunk
is too far in the future for what I'm thinking of.

From:
--
Simon Richard Clarkstone: s.r.cl?rkst?n?@durham.ac.uk/s?m?n.cl?rkst?n?@
hotmail.com ### "I have a spelling chequer / it came with my PC /
it plainly marks for my revue / Mistake's I cannot sea" ...
by: John Brophy (at: http://www.cfwf.ca/farmj/fjjun96/)
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 23:33:45 GMT, Simon Richard Clarkstone wrote

> This post really has two questions in it:
> * How can I generate realistic cities? (modern or slight future)
> * Does anyone have experience of / information on very large maps in
> roguelikes?
> (These two ideas might actually come together in a game idea I am
> fiddling with.)
>
> Within cities (covering the whole map), I have had the idea of taking
> the area, splitting it recursively into random rectangles down to some
> size, (implemented) then filling the resulting rectangles with grids
> of streets (not yet implemented).
>
> For large maps, I am considering a simplified version of the system
> described here:
> http://www.drizzle.com/~scottb/gdc/continuous-world.htm
> If I use their multiple-coordinate-systems system, then I will be able
> to have maps which are non-euclidean (due to ancient magical /
> technological history, or maybe the inside of a visiting TARDIS) or
> infinite (or whole-planet, e.g. Coruscant), though a pair of 16-bit
> ints for each co-ordinate would not be too much of a space-strain for
> me if I were using Euclidean co-ordiantes (as opposed to the pair of
> 32- or 64-bit ints that Dungeon Siege would have needed). I could
> split the map into chunks and only keep nearby or important chunks in
> memory at one time. Some things could be re-generated each time using
> a seeded RNG, as buildings will be (fairly) indestructible. The
> advantage of only performing calculations for only a fraction of the
> map is increased speed, and not having everything in the game either
> charge at you from half-way across the city or run away before you
> every see it so you can never catch it.

Interesting idea, you got me interested. But didn't someone already try
to implement a roguelike with an infinite universe or something?

Dungeon Siege uses preset maps with nothing random in them (except maybe
the monsters?) So it is very easy to predict how many operations it
will take to load a map - which of course makes it easy to split the
loading process over a longer period of time. But in roguelikes
everything is random, so you don't really know exactly how long it will
take to generate everything (in theory it could even take an infinite
period of time), so how can you safely ration the generation operations
over a longer period of time and still guarantee that there won't be any
loading signs? Splitting a map into rectangles recursively doesn't
sound as processor-consuming as the traditional dungeon-generation
algorithms, but it could still have the same problem.

Of course to counter this you could use a very simplified city
generation algorithm based on a fixed uniform grid - where each building
just occupies a certain part of a grid square. But grid-based cities
sound like a boring idea to me, especially if they're infinitely large.


>
> One problem plot-wise with cities is that you can explore in any
> direction in a city, rather than starting at the top and working down
> as in a dungeon, so it becomes hard to come up with a way of getting
> the player to encounter easy enemies first, and harder ones later.
> Obviously traditional rogue-player behaviour (slaughter) would cause
> some alarm, and cause progressively stronger weapons/troops to be sent
> in (only fun if you're Godzilla or similar), which might be able to
> provide the required effect.

Another problem with this is with the setting of the goal of the game.
It would be hard to have a good winning condition if you have an
infinite city and can move in any direction.

>
> Some random mobile things you could encounter, from various possible
> roguelikes set in modern cities (playing as e.g.: street-trader, pimp,
> spy, rampaging monster, policeman ("cop" for you Americans), etc.):
> * child, youth, (young/old) woman, (young/old) man
> * car, van, SUV, motorbike, lorry,
> * fireman, fire truck, policeman, police car, medic/doctor, ambulance
> * marine, sniper, tank, humvee, B52
> * helicopter, news reporter, camera crew
> * scientist, banker, shopkeeper, office worker, street performer,
> street-cleaner (the person or the vehicle), driver, builder
> * punk, mod, rocker


> * whore, pimp, drug-dealer

Please no pimps/whores.

> * spy (once identified)
> * cat, dog, rat, alligator (sewers), (various zoo animals)
> Some of these were mentioned also in the cyberpunk posts, but
> cyberpunk is too far in the future for what I'm thinking of.
>
> From:



--
Kostatus
kostatus at ihug dot co dot nz
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

At Sun, 19 Jun 2005 00:33:45 +0100,
Simon Richard Clarkstone wrote:

> * How can I generate realistic cities? (modern or slight future)

What do you mean by 'realistic'?
There's certain dualism in the game map generation, it's pretty obvious
once you realise it, but it may take a while to do it.

There are usually two goals you want with your map. They sometimes collide
and you must choose.

1. Maps that look like they are supposed to. Caves looking like caves,
castles looking like castles, cities looking like cities and dungeons
looking like dungeons. It seems like the main concern of authors, but
note that all it adds to the game is aesthetic values and immersion.

2. Maps that are levels for games. That are good to play on. It usualy
involves assuring reachability of all areas, good connectivity without
long dead-ends, some puzzle and boss-reward structures, etc.

> * Does anyone have experience of / information on very large maps in
> roguelikes?
> (These two ideas might actually come together in a game idea I am
> fiddling with.)

I've seen several failed projects that attempted it. I think Angband's map
are pretty close to the maximum size that human player can handle and not
get bored.

> Within cities (covering the whole map), I have had the idea of taking
> the area, splitting it recursively into random rectangles down to some
> size, (implemented) then filling the resulting rectangles with grids of
> streets (not yet implemented).

One very simple algorithm is to just stamp a bunch rectangular building
templates with sidewalks around them, something like this:

............=#######=.............
=======....=#######=....========.
######======####=========######=.
######=####=####=#######=######=.
######=####======#######========.
=======#######=.=#########=......
.....=#########=.=#########=======
.....=##=====##=.=#########==#####
.....====###====.============#####
........=###=...............=#####

..: street
=: sidewalk
#: building

It gives surprisingly good results for such a simple algorithm -- there
might be not much realism, but the map is surely interesting to play on.
I used similar algorithm in Z-Day, only there Iused empty rectangles in
order to have more space and ruined look.

> One problem plot-wise with cities is that you can explore in any
> direction in a city, rather than starting at the top and working down as
> in a dungeon, so it becomes hard to come up with a way of getting the
> player to encounter easy enemies first, and harder ones later.
> Obviously traditional rogue-player behaviour (slaughter) would cause
> some alarm, and cause progressively stronger weapons/troops to be sent
> in (only fun if you're Godzilla or similar), which might be able to
> provide the required effect.

You can just make the danger increase as you go in certain direction,
or go farther from the starting point. Also, some signs of increased
danger might help the player to choose the right area (you could use
grafitti for this).

--
Radomir `The Sheep' Dopieralski @**@_
(><) 3 Ouch!
. . . ..v.vVvVVvVvv.v.. .
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Chris Morris wrote:
> That said, I could probably find a map much bigger than an Angband
> level very interesting if:

Good points. There is no need for the map to be larger than needed.
Nethack has small maps, but still most of the rooms have no action
or purpose, they are just there as an alternative to a corridor:)
I believe in variable size maps for each level or level type, so you
don't need to stick to that 80x20 or whatever and let that prevent
you to create more interesting places, like big cities.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

The Sheep <thesheep@ sheep.prv.pl> writes:
> Simon Richard Clarkstone wrote:
> > * Does anyone have experience of / information on very large maps in
> > roguelikes?
> > (These two ideas might actually come together in a game idea I am
> > fiddling with.)
>
> I've seen several failed projects that attempted it. I think Angband's map
> are pretty close to the maximum size that human player can handle and not
> get bored.

I think Angband's maps are well above that size... Single screen up to
Crawl-ish size works for me.

That said, I could probably find a map much bigger than an Angband
level very interesting if:

1) It had variety of terrain. If you joined the ADOM map together so
that you walked up to Terinyo instead of pressing '>' on the right
square, then provided that you had a 'speed through boring
wilderness' key - or adjusted the map to remove the boring bits of
wilderness - it would be just as interesting.

2) There weren't another 99 just like it only with different colours
of centipede lower down.

--
Chris
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Chris Morris wrote:
> The Sheep <thesheep@ sheep.prv.pl> writes:
>
>>Simon Richard Clarkstone wrote:
>>
>>>* Does anyone have experience of / information on very large maps in
>>>roguelikes?
>>>(These two ideas might actually come together in a game idea I am
>>>fiddling with.)
>>
>>I've seen several failed projects that attempted it. I think Angband's map
>>are pretty close to the maximum size that human player can handle and not
>>get bored.
>
>
> I think Angband's maps are well above that size... Single screen up to
> Crawl-ish size works for me.
>
> That said, I could probably find a map much bigger than an Angband
> level very interesting if:
>
> 1) It had variety of terrain. If you joined the ADOM map together so
> that you walked up to Terinyo instead of pressing '>' on the right
> square, then provided that you had a 'speed through boring
> wilderness' key - or adjusted the map to remove the boring bits of
> wilderness - it would be just as interesting.
>
> 2) There weren't another 99 just like it only with different colours
> of centipede lower down.

Of course not. One huge level is an *alternative* to lots of levels
stacked vertically, not an addition. There could even be *no* stairs.
In this situation, I was thinking of just having one main ground level
of city, but some of the buildings could be enterable and have multiple
floors. Anyway, a city naturally lends itself to a variety of terrain:
expensive housing, office blocks, roofs, parks, lakes, wide streets,
shopping areas, shopping malls, car parks, narrow streets, back yards, etc.

(At an inconsequential tangent to this, an office block would be a great
place to set a humorous roguelike, rather than the boring wizard's
tower. You would wander through cube farms, fighting off workers and
malicious office furniture, quaffing potions of coffee, reading Reports
of Scare Intern, and plundering desks for supplies of rubber bands
(ammo), to get to the Evil Boss/Computer at the top that is causing
mayhem ... or maybe just to get permission to extend your holiday by 6
hours. :-> )

--
Simon Richard Clarkstone: s.r.cl?rkst?n?@durham.ac.uk/s?m?n.cl?rkst?n?@
hotmail.com ### "I have a spelling chequer / it came with my PC /
it plainly marks for my revue / Mistake's I cannot sea" ...
by: John Brophy (at: http://www.cfwf.ca/farmj/fjjun96/)
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Chris Morris wrote:
> The Sheep <thesheep@ sheep.prv.pl> writes:
>
>>Simon Richard Clarkstone wrote:
>>
>>>* Does anyone have experience of / information on very large maps in
>>>roguelikes?
>>>(These two ideas might actually come together in a game idea I am
>>>fiddling with.)
>>
>>I've seen several failed projects that attempted it. I think Angband's map
>>are pretty close to the maximum size that human player can handle and not
>>get bored.
>
>
> I think Angband's maps are well above that size... Single screen up to
> Crawl-ish size works for me.
>
> That said, I could probably find a map much bigger than an Angband
> level very interesting if:
>
> 1) It had variety of terrain. If you joined the ADOM map together so
> that you walked up to Terinyo instead of pressing '>' on the right
> square, then provided that you had a 'speed through boring
> wilderness' key - or adjusted the map to remove the boring bits of
> wilderness - it would be just as interesting.
>
> 2) There weren't another 99 just like it only with different colours
> of centipede lower down.

Of course not. One huge level is an *alternative* to lots of levels
stacked vertically, not an addition. There could even be *no* stairs.
In this situation, I was thinking of just having one main ground level
of city, but some of the buildings could be enterable and have multiple
floors. Anyway, a city naturally lends itself to a variety of terrain:
expensive housing, office blocks, roofs, parks, lakes, wide streets,
shopping areas, shopping malls, car parks, narrow streets, back yards, etc.

(At an inconsequential tangent to this, an office block would be a great
place to set a humorous roguelike, rather than the boring wizard's
tower. You would wander through cube farms, fighting off workers and
malicious office furniture, quaffing potions of coffee, reading Reports
of Scare Intern, and plundering desks for supplies of rubber bands
(ammo), to get to the Evil Boss/Computer at the top that is causing
mayhem ... or maybe just to get permission to extend your holiday by 6
hours. :-> )

--
Simon Richard Clarkstone: s.r.cl?rkst?n?@durham.ac.uk/s?m?n.cl?rkst?n?@
hotmail.com ### "I have a spelling chequer / it came with my PC /
it plainly marks for my revue / Mistake's I cannot sea" ...
by: John Brophy (at: http://www.cfwf.ca/farmj/fjjun96/)
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

At Mon, 20 Jun 2005 20:47:05 +0100,
Simon Richard Clarkstone wrote:

> Chris Morris wrote:
>> 2) There weren't another 99 just like it only with different colours
>> of centipede lower down.

> Of course not. One huge level is an *alternative* to lots of levels
> stacked vertically, not an addition. There could even be *no* stairs.
> In this situation, I was thinking of just having one main ground level
> of city, but some of the buildings could be enterable and have multiple
> floors.

I'm afraid that wound't be comfortable to play on. You see, people seem to
need a "clear cut" once in a while, because of their limited perception.
It's not fun when you suffer the effects of your actions from before
several hundreds turns ago. Human attention doesn't scale well.


> (At an inconsequential tangent to this, an office block would be a great
> place to set a humorous roguelike, rather than the boring wizard's
> tower. You would wander through cube farms, fighting off workers and
> malicious office furniture, quaffing potions of coffee, reading Reports
> of Scare Intern, and plundering desks for supplies of rubber bands
> (ammo), to get to the Evil Boss/Computer at the top that is causing
> mayhem ... or maybe just to get permission to extend your holiday by 6
> hours. :-> )

Well, Necrophobia is supposed to be set in a similar setting... At least
map-wise. Well, you indeed do fight against office clerks, as well as
guards, janitors, and clients, but they are all zombified, so it's not
that funny. However no aggressive furniture, and you land on the roof and
try to get to the basement. And of course you don't use rubber bands when
you can find those 'break the glass' fire axes, various tools (nail-guns
and chainsaws are pretty handy) and your boss surely had a gun in his
drawer.

Potions of coffee, top secret reports and desks to plunder are pretty good
ideas actually, and I think they go in ;)

Disclaimer: Yes, it *IS vaporware indeed.

--
Radomir `The Sheep' Dopieralski @**@_
(*+) 3 Sparkle
. . . ..v.vVvVVvVvv.v.. .
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Quoting The Sheep <sheep1 % sheep.prv.pl>:
>Simon Richard Clarkstone wrote:
>>In this situation, I was thinking of just having one main ground level
>>of city, but some of the buildings could be enterable and have multiple
>>floors.
>I'm afraid that wound't be comfortable to play on. You see, people seem to
>need a "clear cut" once in a while, because of their limited perception.

Also, roguelikes are about exploration. A "level" of city that's too big
to explore is going to jar with fundamental expectations of the genre.
--
David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Kill the tomato!
Today is Oneiros, Presuary.