• @SchmidtGenetics
    link
    22 days ago

    Procedural is still based off of seeds and can be recreated on any machine with the same seed.

    I think the point would be to have truly random generated maps.

    • @dustyData
      link
      42 days ago

      You don’t want truly random, whatever that means to you. 99.9999’% of what randomness produces would be unplayable noise. Nowhere near anything a human would consider fun, engaging, or even interesting at all. The gaming marketing world went already through this discussion. Random generation without human intervention does not create fun games.

      • @ZILtoid1991
        link
        12 days ago

        Best genAI could do is a wave collapse algorithm where words could control some parameters, but is a dumb idea.

      • @SchmidtGenetics
        link
        12 days ago

        Random generation without human intervention does not create fun games.

        Well arguably that’s the point of having the AI, it establishes what’s good and what’s not while still being random.

        It’s the human element dude.

        • @dustyData
          link
          02 days ago

          AI is not human. And don’t call me dude.

          • @SchmidtGenetics
            link
            0
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            And neither is procedural generation, so what’s your point then? They’re trying to make something truly random, no need to shit on it just because you’re biased against AI in general or don’t understand the point.

            I bet you rely on spellcheck and auto correct don’t you…? That’s not humans either, yet it’s acceptable. Hypocrite.

    • Pennomi
      link
      English
      52 days ago

      AI still uses random seeds like other procedural algorithms.

      • @SchmidtGenetics
        link
        2
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        They could generate random seeds as it’s being generated making it truly random.

        With AI the same input will not always return the same result, unless asking for a black and white answer that is.

        • Pennomi
          link
          English
          22 days ago

          Surely the random seed should be considered a necessary part of the input, no?

          • @SchmidtGenetics
            link
            12 days ago

            If you want repeatable results, the point would for it to not be repeatable, every thing would be unique.

            What would be the point of making a game if someone could just repeat it with reverse engineering some seeds?

            • Pennomi
              link
              English
              22 days ago

              People love swapping Minecraft seeds because it allows them to share unique experiences. Like if something really cool generated, other people will want to see that thing happen!

              To deny players this would be a huge error - seed hunting is a non-trivial community engagement factor.

              • @SchmidtGenetics
                link
                1
                edit-2
                2 days ago

                Okay, and this is attempting to do something different, being truly random.

                Both can exist, no?

                Lots of games that use procedural generation don’t have public seeds or a way to input them sometimes, so there’s plenty of precedence that people want the opposite too.