3 ms·

> every pixel is simulated That statement, on its own, is meaningless buzzzwords to me. What would it mean for it not to be true: where does one find _unsimula

> every pixel is simulated That statement, on its own, is meaningless buzzzwords to me. What would it mean for it not to be true: where does one find _unsimulated_ pixels? Surely all pixels are digital simulations by their nature? What is seems to mean is that the pixels are the output of some physics engine rather than being hand-drawn art.

monsieurbanana 6y ago
I understood from the get-go what they meant. > What is seems to mean is that the pixels are the output of some physics engine rather than being hand-drawn art. ... whereas I wouldn't understand your description if I didn't knew what you were trying to say already.
- SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago
  Ok, so what to you differentiates, in general, a "real" pixel from a "simulated" pixel? It's not clear. Is this a term of art that games industry insiders know? I understand what weather forecasters mean when they talk about "hurricanes" vs. "simulated hurricanes" . So how does that apply to pixels? I apologize if I came across as dismissive of the headline, but there is a genuine comprehension gap here. OK, you understand it just fine, but that reply doesn't help me close the gap.
  - magicalhippo 6y ago
    In regular 2D games most pixels are simply drawn, based on a sprite or texture. Think Super Mario, each block of ground is a sprite, each coin box is a sprite. The sprites might be drawn based on more or less involved simulation, think the mushrooms that move and change direction when they hit an obstacle. But the pixels making up the mushroom is just drawn based on the mushrooms location, same as always. In Noita you can think of each pixel on screen as being a 1x1 sprite. Each one simulated.
    - SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago
      > In Noita you can think of each pixel on screen as being a 1x1 sprite. Each one simulated. So we're talking about "every pixel is _individually_ simulated", as opposed to "pixels simulated in groups"?
      - magicalhippo 6y ago
        Well in say Super Mario, most of the sprites aren't simulated at all. They're sitting at fixed locations in the world. The viewpoint changes, but the sprites (tiles) stay where they are. In this respect Noita is like Minecraft, in that each pixel (block) can change. However in Minecraft the state of each block in the world changes while its position is fixed. In Noita each 1x1 sprite (pixel) can move around on its own.
        SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago
        > in say Super Mario, most of the sprites aren't simulated at all That's not a statement that I find a lot of meaning in. The sprites are not imitation sprites? The sprites are not fake? ( https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/simulated https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/simulated ) Do you use a different definition? What words would you use as synonyms of "simulated" here? "Animated" ? "Interactive" ? "run through the physics engine" ? it does seem to be a term of art here.
        magicalhippo 6y ago
        I think the key behind simulation is that it's dynamic. The way the coin box bounces up and down in Super Mario doesn't change in a dynamic way. Once triggered it goes through a predetermined motion. This is unlike say the turtle shells which bounce around depending on what it hits. Its motion is dynamic and dictated by what the player did and the environment it's in. The distinction between animation and simulation can be a bit fuzzy, but for me an animation is typically a predetermined motion while simulation is dynamic and reactive. However, especially in modern games, animation is blended with simulation to increase realism making this distinction less clear, see for example https://youtu.be/yTniZCOCY7o https://youtu.be/yTniZCOCY7o So coming back to Noita, think of every 1x1 sprite in the game world as a Super Mario turtle. They can change state and motion in a dynamic and reactive way.
wccrawford 6y ago
I also think that it's a poor description of what's going on. Judging by the videos, they means that the everything in the level has physics capability. In one preview clip, they show weapons destroying part of the ceiling, and then a large chunk comes down and lands on the ground. It's pretty obviously using physics to do it. There's also water and sand shown. So I think what they really mean is that every single pixel can move, unlike most games where the background tiles are locked in place and the player can never affect them. In 3D games, they usually say something like "Fully destructible environment".
- SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago
  I am speculating now, because these terms are either vague, or specific to a domain that I don't know, but it seems like the "pixel simulation" doesn't just mean that there is "physics capability" / "fully destructible environment" that is then rendered as pixels, but also that the pixel is the unit of the physics engine? i.e. the visible square is the input to and output of the simulation? Is that correct?

monsieurbanana 6y ago

I understood from the get-go what they meant. > What is seems to mean is that the pixels are the output of some physics engine rather than being hand-drawn art. ... whereas I wouldn't understand your description if I didn't knew what you were trying to say already.

SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago
Ok, so what to you differentiates, in general, a "real" pixel from a "simulated" pixel? It's not clear. Is this a term of art that games industry insiders know? I understand what weather forecasters mean when they talk about "hurricanes" vs. "simulated hurricanes" . So how does that apply to pixels? I apologize if I came across as dismissive of the headline, but there is a genuine comprehension gap here. OK, you understand it just fine, but that reply doesn't help me close the gap.
- magicalhippo 6y ago
  In regular 2D games most pixels are simply drawn, based on a sprite or texture. Think Super Mario, each block of ground is a sprite, each coin box is a sprite. The sprites might be drawn based on more or less involved simulation, think the mushrooms that move and change direction when they hit an obstacle. But the pixels making up the mushroom is just drawn based on the mushrooms location, same as always. In Noita you can think of each pixel on screen as being a 1x1 sprite. Each one simulated.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago
    > In Noita you can think of each pixel on screen as being a 1x1 sprite. Each one simulated. So we're talking about "every pixel is _individually_ simulated", as opposed to "pixels simulated in groups"?
    - magicalhippo 6y ago
      Well in say Super Mario, most of the sprites aren't simulated at all. They're sitting at fixed locations in the world. The viewpoint changes, but the sprites (tiles) stay where they are. In this respect Noita is like Minecraft, in that each pixel (block) can change. However in Minecraft the state of each block in the world changes while its position is fixed. In Noita each 1x1 sprite (pixel) can move around on its own.
      - SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago
        > in say Super Mario, most of the sprites aren't simulated at all That's not a statement that I find a lot of meaning in. The sprites are not imitation sprites? The sprites are not fake? ( https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/simulated https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/simulated ) Do you use a different definition? What words would you use as synonyms of "simulated" here? "Animated" ? "Interactive" ? "run through the physics engine" ? it does seem to be a term of art here.
        magicalhippo 6y ago
        I think the key behind simulation is that it's dynamic. The way the coin box bounces up and down in Super Mario doesn't change in a dynamic way. Once triggered it goes through a predetermined motion. This is unlike say the turtle shells which bounce around depending on what it hits. Its motion is dynamic and dictated by what the player did and the environment it's in. The distinction between animation and simulation can be a bit fuzzy, but for me an animation is typically a predetermined motion while simulation is dynamic and reactive. However, especially in modern games, animation is blended with simulation to increase realism making this distinction less clear, see for example https://youtu.be/yTniZCOCY7o https://youtu.be/yTniZCOCY7o So coming back to Noita, think of every 1x1 sprite in the game world as a Super Mario turtle. They can change state and motion in a dynamic and reactive way.

wccrawford 6y ago

I also think that it's a poor description of what's going on. Judging by the videos, they means that the everything in the level has physics capability. In one preview clip, they show weapons destroying part of the ceiling, and then a large chunk comes down and lands on the ground. It's pretty obviously using physics to do it. There's also water and sand shown. So I think what they really mean is that every single pixel can move, unlike most games where the background tiles are locked in place and the player can never affect them. In 3D games, they usually say something like "Fully destructible environment".

SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago
I am speculating now, because these terms are either vague, or specific to a domain that I don't know, but it seems like the "pixel simulation" doesn't just mean that there is "physics capability" / "fully destructible environment" that is then rendered as pixels, but also that the pixel is the unit of the physics engine? i.e. the visible square is the input to and output of the simulation? Is that correct?