Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

I've always played with just the original game.

38 (50.7%)

I started out with other textures but then later switched back to the ascii

17 (22.7%)

I've always played with textures changed

10 (13.3%)

I started out with the original ascii but later switched to other textures

10 (13.3%)

Total Members Voted: 74

[Max™]

I started with the vanilla curses_640x300, had a brief bout of squareness, then started using my own upscaled version of the default set before discovering the amazing rescales Dragon DePlatino did with vectorwizardry and highly recommend them to everyone.

Oh, and varied ground tiles are a must, especially with the shading I use for ground/floor/wall tiles, the quilt of greens and such are nice looking.

[Eric Blank]

I've always used a modified ASCII tileset, Cooz_Curses square 16x16, that adds a little shading to the characters. Makes it easier to pick out the borders of tiles, little easier on the eyes.

[Thorfinn]

I played DF default everything because I enjoy discovering the game. To the point of having several decent forts and vast amounts of FUN! without spoiling the surprises by reading forums or even the Wiki.

But when I gave some tileset (Pheobus, maybe?) a go, I found it easier to get into the RP aspects of the game. Rather than just a "Ho-hum, move the cursor to that particular symbol and press a key and some memory location gets updated and maybe some character changes on a screen somewhere", I was really getting into Tobol Asttaron picking berries from something that even looked a little like a berry bush.

I had been playing "forts" completely mechanically until I got bored with them, then switch to a different game, but just that tiny change was enough to switch me out of programmer mode. One start last summer had no one that was interested in mining, even though several had the stats for it. I let each pursue his own interests, and fortunately the first immigration wave had a couple who really loved having a pick in  hand, Udib and Tekkud, and they later became an item.

For me, the tileset made it a completely different game.

[Sbcc]

Have used the default style since I started playing the game back in 2014. Never really liked the way Tilesets looked.

[Thief^]

I used to play with graphics, but now I play in ascii, using my own tileset. Actually I mostly use a 2x2-upscaled version of it (so 12x16).

[daagar]

I play around with tilesets a ton, but the results of this poll have made me rethink this so my next playthrough will be in ascii of some sort (ie., Taffer, LCD, or CLA).

[Ghills]

I've tried ASCII/curses, but it's simply so cluttered and messy.  Phoebus tileset for me, with the diagonal walls.

[ChristianWeiseth]

I'm confused as to what I should use so I try out as many different things as possible.

I prefer to see my dwarves as sprites, so I can see that there goes Captain of the Guard, and there is my mace lord or champion etc. And like to see the goblins as sprites. But I don't like to see giant's, big creatures, forgotten monsters as sprites because even though the sprite is just a symbol it forms prejudice restriction in my metaphysical perception of that creature when i try to picture the description in my mind. And I don't mind the ASCII graphics for the normal tiles but the dwarves being smiley faces actually restricts my immersion. So I have a oxymoron whereas to use the graphics sets.

Obsidian looks beautiful but I don't like the zoomed in view, same with gemset. So I usually use Phoebus 90% of the time with my self inflected problem described above.

Been playing 43,05 version since the beginning, with the artifact release I don't think I will have a choice though if I understand it correctly, if you want to play the newest version you need to play ASCII.

[FantasticDorf]

Originally i did have a pack (i forget which one, but i played DF as a bundled aesthetic pack) but switched back & adjusted my eyes to the original because I thought id get more 'context' by looking at it as it was meant to be.

For the most part it worked, though i've had people over my shoulder remark about it being unintelligible

[muldrake]

Obsidian looks beautiful but I don't like the zoomed in view, same with gemset. So I usually use Phoebus 90% of the time with my self inflected problem described above.

These are pretty much the two tilesets I use.  I find they convey information effectively.  For instance, I like being able to see particular colors and objects at a glance without thinking too much about it, such as when, for instance, someone walks by with something important like adamantine or color-coded mechanisms intended for some specific purpose.

Unlike Nethack or one of the older roguelikes where I'm just so familiar with them that it would actually seem wrong to use a tileset, I'm just not particularly attracted to the ASCII tileset and it actually distracts me.

[Fleeting Frames]

Been playing 43,05 version since the beginning, with the artifact release I don't think I will have a choice though if I understand it correctly, if you want to play the newest version you need to play ASCII.

Not...really?

You won't be able to use TWBT on the artifact release right when it comes out, but that shouldn't prevent you from adding a tileset.

[Max™]

Yeah, the last "compatibility break" for tilesets was the stepladder, and before that the roots/branches/leaves using the P_t and 1/4 tiles which had previously been free to ignore or use for other purposes.

[pisskop]

'always'?

no.


learned howdo: ascii on df?  yes

and im never going back.

btbf, i dont play much df now