Talk:Procedural generation

message: This needs to be changed. It is Spore specific right now and copys directly from the Spore entry making it redundant since thats probably the only place that links here.
:It's a very interesting concept that will become more and more games will use. I'm removing the cleanup tag. Jacoplane 19:19, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There's also the article on Procedural programming.
Darkling Simulations DarkTree is another popular middleware for procedural texture/shader synthesis, worth a mention if SpeedTree is featured.
Savuporo 14:23, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I think you are correct. The procedural programming page should not like to procedural generation in the See Also section. The two are unrelated in any meaningful way. Jessmartin 06:00, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Older comments 

message: I believe this shall survive the merge with procedural synthesis. Although as far as I know "synthesis" is the correct term, it's more likely average Joe will like "generation" much more.
I'll work on a offline merge in the next few days and propose the results soon. MaxDZ8 20:52, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge comments 

message: There are some other procedural methods which should/could be mentioned in this article:
* L-System - Procedural method for generating trees. This should particularly be mentioned in the speculative paragraph about trees.
* Fractal landscape - Procedural method using fractals for generating terrain.
Quite a few other things relate to these methods as well. Procedural textures and Perlin noise are just a few examples. This article could ideally be restructured to include a more general overview of the variety of techniques used in this area as well as some applications.Jessmartin 06:08, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other Procedural Generation methods and related topics 

message: In DOOM (the 1993 version), iD software had a feature called "auto-pitch" I believe, which adjusted the pitch of sounds randomly when the sound was played. Forexample so that gunshots would sound different, or when selecting stuff in the menu.
I'm not sure I remember this one but I'd rather look at it as a sound processing effect and as far as I remember the sounds were taken from pre-made files so I don't see the connection with procedural generation. Thank you anyway for pointing this out here. MaxDZ8 talk 16:14, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Example of procedural generation in DOOM 

message: Procedural generation as an application of functional programming
Procedurally generated content such as textures and landscapes may exhibit variation, but the generation of a particular item or landscape must be identical from frame to frame. Accordingly, the functions used must be referentially transparent, always returning the same result for the same point, so that they may be called in any order and their results freely cached as necessary. This is similar to lazy evaluation in functional programming languages.
I understand this is page actually unverified but I still think something should be put here with salt. Regarding the above statements, I would say that:
* This is way too short to be a chapter by itself.
* The statements introduce external concepts (functional programming, lazy evaluation, referentially transparent), this would be good but I personally believe those are way too far from the topic.
* Some of those properties are adviseable but not always required.
Could you please point out the goal of that? MaxDZ8 talk 10:49, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Procedural generation happens to be an application of functional programming, and really ought to be called "functional generation". The problem is that the people who write procedural generation code don't seem to be very familiar with functional programming, so the connection isn't obvious to them. They may create generation functions and be aware that the functions will usually have to have a certain kind of property, but may not be aware that computer scientists refer to that property as "referential transparency", and so on. —Ashley Y 09:17, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This thing... 

message: Would an article detailing terrain generation fit as a stand alone article on Wikipedia? Since there's a lot of terms for it (pretty much any combination of "procedural"/"generation"/"synthesis"/"terrain"/"landscape"), what would be an appropriate title? Indeed, there is already an article on procedural textures, although it does seriously need more content. In any case, there are already several articles concerning terrain generation algorithms and a "parent" article is sorely needed. I'm pretty sure I'd be able to fit in a lot of content. Nezbie 05:10, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wonder if there are any orphaned articles on the subject. In any case, some relevant articles include: algorithms (Fractal landscape, Diamond-square algorithm) and software (MojoWorld, Terragen). The applications and widespread use of terrain generation alone should make the topic worthy of a full-fledged article, including elaboration of some of the most used techniques (including subdivision algorithms, frequency synthesis, faulting, noise, etc...). Nezbie 18:39, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Landscape/Terrain Generation

message: This sentence didn't make sense to me, so I removed it: "it has been employed in many songs (for example The Cure's songs largely employ synthesizers while techno music is often largely synthesized)".  Creating electronic sounds seems a far stretch from procedural generation.  (Feel free to correct me, of course.) Tlogmer ( talk / contributions ) 16:22, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sound 

message: AFAIK many rogue-like games (like Nethack or Moria) generate their dungeons "randomly"... Does this also fit into this category, and an someone confirm this? 193.96.240.2 08:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I also think The Elder Scrolls II: Daggerfall may have used this process. The majority of its cities, landscape, and dungeons were generated at the start of a new game rather than beforehand. Zenithan 19:35, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I'd have to agree, that link is pretty useless. Virek 13:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isn't this also used extensively in "Rogue-like" dungeon-crawling games? 

message: This month's Game Developer Magazine references to this article in its "Inner product" section! Congratulation to the editors! This should be taken as an indicator this is actually "good"!
85.18.201.168 11:41, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Real world ref to wiki 

message: If "procedural synthesis is actually the correct term" then why is the entry still called procedural generation. Shouldn't the entry be under the "correct" title of procedural synthesis, not a synonymous title and having the "correct" term redirect here. Just a thought, correct me if I'm misunderstanding something.
#I have found no proof of the actual "superiority" of a term over the another (besides my knowledge).
::Well, if there is no actual superiority between the terms, then why do you clearly assert the "correct"ness of synthesis in the second paragraph? It either is or is not more "correct", and if it is more "correct" then my feeling is that, regardless of publicity, the article should be titled by the "correct" term. In my opinion, one of two things should be done:
::#Move the article to Procedural Synthesis and state in the introduction that "although procedural generation is the more popular term, procedural synthesis is actually the correct term." or...
::#Remove the statement stating the correctness, and therefore superiority, of synthesis.
#New: considering this has been reported to the press (see above) it doesn't seem rationale to change it now.
MaxDZ8 talk 08:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Common courtesy, and I wanted someone more knowledgeable to make the final choice. MadScientistVX 23:13, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Generation v. Synthesis 

message: I hope nobody is upset, but I feel that the section looks better the way I organized it. PhycoFalcon 05:33, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I found a reference for Jade Cocoon.  Unfortunately it's on GameFAQs (http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/psx/file/197666/10553), so it can't be hotlinked Eoseth (talk) 07:58, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Organization of Software using procedural generation 

message: The image :Image:Kkrieger screenshot 01.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --04:09, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Kkrieger screenshot 01.jpg

message: I don't know how exactly it works, but Runescape uses a procedural graphics rendering technique which produces (as far as I know) all models in the game. As it's closed source it's difficult to know the extent, but it clearly shows that the technique is usable.
Despite WP:BOLD I didn't want to add it, because I'm not particularly sure where it goes. If a graphics guru is amongst the people here, then here's an example Philipwhiuk (talk) 20:23, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Runescape 

message: Star Trek Online has a similar "Genesis System", that generates stars, planets and species, but keeps creating these worlds for endless exploration (Similar to Spore).  If a player wants to keep a system they find, all they do is they save the coordinates so other players can find them.  So would Star Trek Online be included in this list, or is the Genesis System different to Procedual generation (Im not very technical when it comes to programing)?  88.105.124.221 (talk) 20:40, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Star Trek Online]] 

message: As far as procedural content for video games go, Castle Wolfenstein predates every game listed with the possible exception of roguelikes (Beneath Apple Manor and Rogue specifically). Some other early examples: Gateway to Apshai which procedurally generated dungeons based on a fixed random seed table (interestingly one of the seeds causes the Atari and C64 versions of the game to crash); The Seven Cities of Gold (video game) which generated an entire New World to explore for Spain. Xot (talk) 12:19, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable Examples 

message: "Procedural generation is a widely used term in the production of media, indicating the possibility to create content on the fly rather than prior to distribution."
This is wrong. It does not matter whether procedural content is generated before or after distribution. Procedural content is produced algorithmically, rather than manually. Of course, every way handling data on a computer requires some sort of algorithm, but that is the best division that can be made. If anyone chooses to generate procedural content, and distributes it after some editing, it may still be largely procedural content. 
Also the article in its present form focuses far too much on computer games, which are just one application. I propose to delete the article and link to procedural modeling instead.
87.153.48.240 (talk) 17:04, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Not wrong.  Slightly misleading, but technically accurate.  Read carefully, with added emphasis: "indicating the possibility".  With procedural generation, it is *possible* to create content after distribution instead of before.  You don't have to, but you can.--99.17.1.168 (talk) 04:43, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Serious Editing Needed 

message: I replaced a few of the broken links with the same content from alternate sources.
For the link to the book "Texturing & Modeling - A Procedural Approach" I have put a link to a website of one of the authors that talks about an older version of the book. It's far from perfect, but at least this link works.
I also added in one link to an article from Gamasutra that I thought was informative FatPope (talk) 02:21, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Also added in a link to 'FUEL', with appropriate reference --FatPope (talk) 02:51, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links Fixed 

message: Cellular automata, along with fractals, are good examples of procedural generation. However, this section reads more like an "advertisement" of the topic, meant to convince game designers to use CA. Are there any actual examples of CA being used in games or for other kinds of content generation? EverGreg (talk) 16:27, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cellular automata 

message: It should be listed under Sandbox or something.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.228.145.220 (talk) 02:28, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minecraft Isn't a Strategy Game 

message: I'm 99% sure Coded Arms and its sequel Coded_Arms:_Contagion have random levels.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.121.154.215 (talk) 08:24, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coded arms random levels 

message: One of the issues with this article seems to be the length of that list. It actually links to a category, so why does it need to list so many games that make use of procedural generation? Does it aid in understanding what procedural generation is about? It also results in a lot of odd categories that don't always make sense.
I suggest using the games in this list to fill out the category some more. Otherwise, may I trim down that list? I don't want to delete half of the list without hearing any opinions. Maplestrip (talk) 09:24, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trim down the list 

message: I'm working to find some references: feel free to use them. They might be quite a read, though.
*  
**Entire book on using procedural generation for textures, shading, modeling, etc. Quite a read, can someone get the "juicy" bits out of it and implement it to this article?
*
**One page description of procedural generation in video games and the evolution over time thereof? Only really skimmed through it.
*
**No idea.
I hope some of these are useful. They're already in the right style, so they should be easy to add in: just add <ref> tags around them~ Maplestrip (talk) 09:13, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: I am a new Wikipedia user so if I have done something horribly wrong, please let me know. :)Charles999JF (talk) 16:03, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: You need a source for that. The random encounter/weather/etc. tables in D&D are just that - random, they don't represent procedural generation. --Masem (t) 16:31, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

text: You can't directly site the books that are being used as examples as a source to say they are procedural generation - that is original research. However I was able to find at least two academic papers that credit D&D and other tabletop systems for procedural generation, so I've added those and sourced appropriately. --Masem (t) 17:03, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  I added a note that procedural generation in games originated in D&D.` 

message: Hi Hellknowz,
I'm not an expert on categorization, but sparse categorization on articles seems less useful for readers (at the very least personally speaking). Currently, this article is only categorized in :Category:Procedural generation.
Also, in your revert you said , but it's only part of that category because I added it today.
I was mulling over whether the procedural generation category should be CfD nominated, but regardless I feel it's useful for this article to be categorized in :Category:Applications of randomness
--Retro (talk | contribs) 13:37, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Additional note: it appears there are some specific guidelines for eponymous categories: WP:EPON. It provides three ways for handling the situation, and for our purposes, I think #1 makes sense. A strictly nonredundant category hierarchy isn't an absolute rule. Retro (talk | contribs) 13:52, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi. You're right, I didn't realize this. I've never actually encountered this sort of case. The part I was referring to is the WP:SUBCAT, i.e. "pages for sub-categories should be categorised under the most specific parent categories". But here I agree that WP:CATMAIN applies, i.e. "articles with an eponymous category may be categorized in the broader categories". I reverted my undo. I don't have any comment on sparse categorization - that's not really a factor for anything as far as I know. Some topics just don't have categories. —  HELLKNOWZ ∣ TALK 18:28, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categorization in applications of randomness