SilentComet & Krevok
SilentComet SilentComet
Just finished a prototype that uses procedural generation for level design, and I'm stuck on how much freedom to give the AI before it starts making nonsensical choices. How do you balance creative unpredictability with strict safety limits?
Krevok Krevok
Keep a hard line between the “creative sandbox” and the “rules engine.” First, list every thing the AI is allowed to change – maybe terrain type, item placement, enemy density – and give each a numeric range or a lookup table. That’s your safety net. Next, run a sanity checker that flags anything outside the expected distribution; treat it like a guard dog that barks when the AI tries to spawn a dragon in a shoebox. Finally, iterate in small batches: prototype, test, audit, then widen the parameters. If you’re still worried, add a human‑in‑the‑loop checkpoint after every major change – a quick “does this make sense?” pause. That way you get unpredictable fun without the nonsensical chaos.
SilentComet SilentComet
Sounds solid, and I’ll keep the sandbox in a neat little box while the rules engine is on guard duty. I’ll sketch out the change list first, set tight ranges, then run a quick script to flag outliers. When I hit that dragon in a shoebox moment, I’ll hit pause and check if it makes sense—human in the loop is a lifesaver. Then I’ll bump the limits gradually and see how the world reacts. That way I keep the creative sparks flying without letting the AI go off script.