Wang tile
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
We even wrote an article about authoring textures using the technique here: https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/55091
In the end though, we found that the time spent authoring textures like this didn't really pay off so we stopped using the feature.
Instead of that, we blend randomly between a few different material versions that make up the ground which leads to a similar but easier to achieve effect. An obvious example is here http://web.poecdn.com/image/xboxbeta/ss/Panel1/screenshot3.j... where we have a snowy and non-snowy version of the same ground texture and we scatter blends to the snowy version randomly.
I played PoE back in summer and autumn 2012, in closed beta, and I absolutely loved the game. I even spent some money on it :-) Then my gaming PC died. Nowadays I only play games on PS4. I just noticed that an Xbox1 version was released a few months back: are there any plans of ever bringing PoE to PS4? I would love to play it again, but can’t rationalise getting either a gaming PC or an Xbox to do so.
:( Looks like my closed-beta purchases are going to continue to go to waste. I’ll miss you, little kiwi bird...
I keep wondering if https://grahamshawcross.com/2012/10/12/wang-tiles-and-turing... is practical as a bathroom wall.
If a finite set of tiles can tile a quadrant of the plane, it can also tile the full plane.
One would guess that there is a constructive proof, but in fact the proof relies on a weak version of the axiom of choice (see for example this proof https://caicedoteaching.wordpress.com/2009/08/24/502-konigs-... ).
1/ Complete part of the tiling in the upper right quadrant (this tiling exists by assumption)
2/ Shove all the tiles down and to the left
3/ Repeat.
It's very surprising that step 2 needs the axiom of choice. (Usually when I'm this surprised it means I've misunderstood something!)
Edit: your link proves something stronger - that the ability to tile an nxn square for all n is equivalent to tiling a quadrant and tiling a plane. I guess that's where choice comes in, is it?
> our link proves something stronger
No, it proves that the 3 statements are equivalent, so it is not stronger.
Because surely all points do get tiled eventually by the method above.
Finding progressively larger, finite tilings is not the same as having a single infinite tiling, just like finding larger and larger natural numbers is not the same as having a single number larger than all natural numbers (which wouldn't be a natural number).
König's lemma implies that for tilings both statements are in fact equivalent.
Very nice analogy!
> König's lemma implies that for tilings both statements are in fact equivalent.
Exactly, and instead of working by shifting the tiling (which would produce a sequence of incompatible tilings) it works by finding a sequence of finite tilings where each is a subset of the next, so it makes sense to take the union of the sequence.
[1] http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.84....
people in this field made DNA tile game of life capable implementations, with a full logic substrate.
the chemistry involved is very sensitive but in theory they could compile programs into this (in early 2017 they were limited to afew hundred dna pairs in program size before error rates became unmanageable)
ps: also look up damien woodz
In addition to color it supports 'oriented colors': blue+ matches blue- for example. This allows graphical manipulations of the art assets to be reflected in the tile structure.