Opus Magnum Thread!
Post your solutions, good or bad (like mine)
Opus Magnum
Jackson Carter
Other urls found in this thread:
Chase Lewis
Ian Martinez
Andrew Lewis
Bentley Myers
I've been playing his newer game Exapunks a lot more lately but I'll post a few of mine anyway
Christian Lopez
Gavin Perry
Spoilered because it hurts to look at
How the hell did anyone optimize this level
Jordan Gomez
Is this a gore thread now?
Caleb Richardson
this one feels very fluid
Hunter Barnes
Austin Baker
i tried
one day i'll make a perfect lipstick with optimal resource-pulling
Anthony Russell
Gavin Miller
Lucas Davis
Brayden Myers
Is this a game for autistic people?
Adam Cooper
mine isn't much better
damn nice
Nicholas Ramirez
no, it's not really that tough or abstract.
TIS and Shenzhen are, though. And to some extent Exapunks.
Ryder Wood
Gabriel Moore
James Hill
Has anyone found/made any good steam workshop levels?
Its a puzzle game so yes
Henry Phillips
It's for chads who batter and slap arealets out of the way.
Owen King
behold, my golden cock
Evan Sullivan
The Chad alchemist
Julian Bell
The CHAD SWING
Levi Sanders
Liam Wright
What's with the magical reappaering copper in your gif?
Opus magnum is the only Zachtronics game I've played, do they all work as optimization puzzles?
Colton Cruz
Yes, literally all of them do (except ironclad tactics which nobody played).
And don't be put off by TIS-100 or Exapunks either. Because Opus Magnum is technically a programming game.
My first Zach game was Infinifactory and my second was TIS-100, and what I learned from the first applied well to the second
Leo Morris
i'd really highly recommend spacechem, it's like opus but more challenging in every way
it's also consistently like 99 cents during steam sales
infinifactory also feels very opus-y, in 3d. it's extremely good. it has the upside of being very open and spacious like opus (while spacechem is rather restrictive with size. this doesn't matter at first but makes things very complicated toward the end).
TIS, Shenzhen, and Exa are all more explicitly coding, but any of the games involves programming to an extent so if you felt good about opus then TIS might be fun to try. Shenzhen is very very hard. I haven't played Exa.
If you've played Human Resource Machine, that's sort of how TIS and Shenzhen feel. However, both are extremely restrictive like spacechem.
Samuel Howard
>I haven't played Exa
It's similar to TIS-100 and Shenzhen I/O, but the programs you write have to navigate a physical space, and sometimes interact with enemy programs.
It also gives you unlimited space to work with like Opus Magnum, but if you go over a certain size your solution won't count on the histograms
Dylan Ross
Thanks for the recommendations. I never tried spacechem because of the memes but maybe I'll give it a try.
Does this make me autistic?
Angel Smith
Optimization usually comes down to figuring out prime factors, but I seem to remember that one being a massive pain in the ass
Ryder Watson
Ahh, I see you're a man of culture as well.
Kayden Smith
This is one of my most cherished ones, because it was the first "Textbook" solution I ever made - one where I knew with mathematical certainty that I had completely optimized the number of cycles.
Jack Nguyen
>My purified gold solution is so goddamn inefficient that it's too big to post in this thread
>10MB of fuck
It looks really good, nice job. Here's my first attempt for comparison.
I've kind of given up on the optimization game personally, especially after the epilogue levels FUCK VISCOUS SLUDGE
Isaac Martin
Chase Gray
no idea which one is my best, but my autism likes this one
Hunter Watson
Damn that's smooth.
Mason Myers
>only 10MB
My minimum cost solution ended up being 20MB
i.imgur.com
Owen Davis
Symmetry like in yours is nice though. You could probably tighten it up a good bit by starting the cycle anew earlier.
Andrew Barnes
This one is so impressive that it hurts my self-esteem
Alexander Wright
Justin Ramirez
MA, I wish Spacechem had this feature.
Leo Gomez
Damn, beats mine with one cycle. That's a tough level because of the giant hole you need to work with.
Lucas Brooks
Spinny stuff is fun in Opus Magnum. Too bad there aren't too many where you can utilize it.
Ethan Rivera
Just redid this for some minor area improvements, and now it's in the second bin on the area histogram. I feel sorry and proud for anyone who made it into that first bin.
Eli Morales
>tfw none of your friends like Zaktronics games so never get to share solutions or talk about it
I got to oil in Factorio before they thought it was too complex/difficult and quit. Shit sucks.
Chase Nelson
Not that I'm pretending like I'm good at these games. Always feels like I just brute force the solution instead of figuring it out.
Josiah Foster
This is all I have for some reason. All of my other solutions I guess I'd gone in to further optimize them but then left before they were complete. Thought I'd had more.
Grayson Jackson
There aren't too many where you can utilize it WELL, anyways.
I know this feel. I'm not sure if I should feel vainly smart or socially anxious about it.
Leo Peterson
Incidentally, here's some tips for optimization.
Generally it comes down to two things: Initialization time, and iteration time.
Iteration time is fairly simple. Consider - The Hangover Cure. The output requires 3 atoms. You have one atom of input. The absolute fastest you can pull atoms out of an input is once every two cycles. Therefore, if you had absolutely no constraints, and perfect efficiency, if you were pulling out atoms as fast as possible, your absolute maximum throughput is gonna be 6 cycles per finished product. This is harder to calculate on some, but in that one, it's easy. If you see a solution that has a sizable difference in cycle count, they're probably doing iteration better than you.
The key thing to remember is that your iteration cycle count is going to be restricted by your input. Sometimes, this is a really simple problem. Other times it gets tricky. On a mathematical level, it's usually about factoring primes.
The second one is initialization time. This one is trickier. Consider a shower. You can sometimes turn the tap on, but it'll still take a second or two for the water to start coming out of the shower head. This is because the pipe needs time to fill with water before it starts flowing freely. This is the "initialization time" of your puzzle. It's about getting everything into position.
Sometimes, you can perfectly optimize the initialization time perfectly - The theoretical maximum is going to be however long it takes you to get your last piece into position. Consider, again, - On the last atom, you pull it out, move it into position to bond with the others, move it over the output, and drop it. That's as fast as you can do that. It has to be moved off of the input, and it has to be bonded, and it has to be dropped.
In practice, initialization time is usually harder to maximize than iteration time, and yields less results.
Here, have a sub-optimal solution to a final puzzle.
Nathan Davis
Xavier Long
Reading your post is like listening to one of my /fit/ friends talk down to me about diet and exercise. It's all really good advice and makes sense when you spell it out, but I'd never have the discipline to put it into practice. You(r solutions) still look sexy as hell though.