I was focusing on confirming details for the “muscle” part in the Multicellular Stage we are trying to implement, from the post linked below. Implementation details seem solid and I think are largely up to how much of this is worth it in regards to programming effort.
The larger question-mark however I think is related to how we will treat motility v. sessility as a player transitions to the Macroscopic. It’s a tricky question: we need to have some modicum of theory behind our decision, but the microscopic-macroscopic jump will be one of the most abstract and gamey parts of Thrive by necessity.
With how complex and large the jump between the microscopic and macroscopic world will be - and how the macroscopic will in many ways be a completely new game - I think we ought to make sure as many binding choices leading into the Macroscopic are as intuitive as possible.
Note that this doesn’t necessarily mean that the binding choices should be wishy-washy or have easily-ignorable effects: just that a player should clearly understand if they make X choice, that means Y in the Macroscopic Stage.
Starting off the discussion with two over-arching questions:
- What traits in the Multicellular Stage will define a “motile” starting creature in the macroscopic stage? As in, the player will experience standard motile gameplay? The mere presence of muscular parts?
- What traits in the Multicellular Stage will define a “sessile” starting creature in the macroscopic stage? As in, the player experiences gameplay with the future “sessile game mode”? A lack of motility parts? The presence of a specific “holdfast” part?