Print

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

[Torak]

quote:Originally posted by claymore666:
<STRONG>i pretty much refuse to play DF until there's a graphical frontend with a point and click interface.</STRONG>

I dont care about people who want a graphical front for convenience, but if you refuse to play the game without it, you're a pathetic person who I wish never gets his selfish demands satisfied.

[Sofaspud]

quote:Originally posted by 0x517A5D:
<STRONG>
But is harder, as you'd have to display everything without context clues -- you would essentially be reimplementing the entire display system.  Without having the source code to study.  And you would still have to parse the 80x25 viewport at some point, to look for those popup messageboxes if nothing else.
</STRONG>

This is essentially what I was talking about -- a complete reimplementation of the display system, precisely because you don't -- you can't -- know what exactly is going on under the hood.

(Technically possible to reverse engineer it from the executable?  Sure.  For us mere mortals?  Nah.  

quote:Originally posted by 0x517A5D:
<STRONG>
Version-dependency can be worked around to some extent.  All of my utilities are written to attempt to be version-independent, so it can work.

I do wonder how Toady feels about us talking about abusing his precious baby on these forums that he runs himself.</STRONG>

I've seen the wiki discussion, and I've been playing with a utility to read the raw world files (post-gen) to do the find X bit without having to use (for example) reveal; in part this leads to my conclusion that Toady is using some form of mathematical function to store some things rather than a 1-to-1 map.  I'd like to see the utilities work, actually, and I salute anyone who feels like doing the gruntwork.  My memory-mapping days are long past, heh.  I don't have the patience for it anymore (this is why I'm sticking to meddling with the file format.)

Anyway, all that aside, the memory mapping is what I was getting at for option 2.  The mapped out locations are a good start, but somewhere in DF there are locations that are used to represent a map of the world.  It could be anything, even something as simple as a linked list of objects to be drawn, but there's got to be something there; it's just a matter of finding it.  Unless Toady took a radically different approach, that is.  Which is also possible.  Heh.

As for discussing his baby, I think he'd speak up if he had a problem with it.  It's not like we're talking about stealing it or something, and I think the population of the boards would rise up and dismember anyone who attempted such a thing *anyway*.  If I were him I'd probably get a kick out of knowing how many people are trying to puzzle out how it works.  

[Torak]

quote:Originally posted by DJ:
<STRONG>I'd help if this project got started. I know a bit about coding, but I never did any memory hacking so I'm not sure I'd be of much use there.

I could also do graphics, though I'm not sure how good I am. Here's a screenshot of a game I'm making (it's been on hold for months now):
   
That's all done in MS Paint. I've discovered the wonders of GIMP since then, and this is an example of what I can do with it (note the horrible angle of legs):
  </STRONG>

Is it just me, or does that game look *alot* like UnrealWorld?

[Red Jackard]

I dunno, but the design could really use some more work.

[Toady One]

Torak, your first post in this thread was uncalled for.

I'm ambivalent about these sorts of things in general.  I can't really predict what would happen if something like this took off, and that makes me uneasy.  I think the existence of a popular front-end could put me in a position I don't want to be in in terms of future development of DF, even if I'm not directly maintaining an API.  At the same time, it's good when people are playing and enjoying the game.  So I'm ambivalent.

[ December 30, 2007: Message edited by: Toady One ]

[Torak]

quote:Originally posted by Toady One:
<STRONG>Torak, your first post in this thread was uncalled for.</STRONG>

Sure it was uncalled for, but im not going to tolerate with someone who says "This game is in ASCII, so I wont play it until it gets graphics."

[Aquillion]

quote:Originally posted by Torak:
<STRONG>

Sure it was uncalled for, but im not going to tolerate with someone who says "This game is in ASCII, so I wont play it until it gets graphics."</STRONG>

Why not?  That's an awful lot of people you won't be able to tolerate.  Some people just can't cope with ASCII interfaces.  It's understandable; the way a game looks and feels is an important part of what it is.

Regarding this idea, though...  well, on one hand, it would attract more people to Dwarf Fortress, which I think is a good thing.  Dwarf Fortress is a good game, and we all want more people playing it, whether we agree with them on the look and interface or not.

...on the other hand, the biggest advantage of a more fancy interface to Dwarf Fortress would be the increased amount of information that the screen could show clearly.  With more detailed graphics, things like 3D environments, objects in clouds or underwater, large numbers of objects in the same place, 'special' effects, water/liquid depth, and so on could all be shown much more clearly.  Very minor details could be used to influence the display, showing details like quality to the player easily at glance.

Hey, that all sounds good, right?  But there's a catch...  several catches, really.  All that will require support from Toady.  It would have implications for designs, for game balance, for the way the underlying 'interface system' is designed, for what information the game tracks and reports at all...  you get the idea.  Having an interface that Toady isn't really involved in eliminates many of the benefits.  It also splits the community; suddenly, people are barely talking the same language, making requests, suggestions, and bug reports based on an entirely different-looking game that shows information differently...  you get the idea.

I'm not sure it would be a bad thing; it might be worth trying.  But I'd sort of rather wait for a far-future version of the game where Toady designs a new interface himself, even if that's years and decades away when everything else is complete.

[Jifodus]

Since this topic has been brought up, again, some time in the future I was going to look at Kobold Quest to see if I can decouple enabler.h and interface.h classes/headers from the main executable and provide an alternate interface for it with little to no changes to the actual game code.

If my assumption of how the Kobold Quest/Dwarf Fortress Game Engine works is correct. By providing a decoupled method of I/O in Kobold Quest. It may be very possible to make the I/O independent in Dwarf Fortress independent as well.

From my cursory examination of enabler.h and interface.h (when I say cursory, I mean examining the function prototypes within the classes) it seems that, within reason, it could be made to use an entirely different method of interface.

I think the only real problem there will be would be the representations of tiles and items between interface and game. One would have to inform the other some sort of characteristics (it could possibly be done by using the object name).

As I said, I'm working with assumptions, until I actually look at the Kobold Quest source indepth I can't say for sure if it can be done or not.

[DJ]

quote:Is it just me, or does that game look *alot* like UnrealWorld?

Guilty as charged. This is my first game, so I ended up borrowing a lot of concepts and interface solutions from URW just to get a playable game as soon as possible. I'm currently working on making it a bit more original.

[ December 31, 2007: Message edited by: DJ ]

[Eagle of Fire]

I'm seconding Torak on this one.

I am not against a graphical interfact, but those players who refuse to play the game don't deserve that we take care of that they want.

When the game will get in beta, then it will be a good time to begin thinking about it. Right now, I'm sure Toady didn't even finish implementing everything he wanted yet.

You don't want to be an alpha tester? Don't test the game...

[Capntastic]

That's pretty much my thought.   The game is in alpha.   At least let some of the key features be developed before you clamor about non-vital stuff.