Print

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

[birdy51]

When I first started playing, I couldn't even identify my character in adventure mode. I had made the mistake of not doing a whole lot of research. O.o

Probably would have given the game up if it weren't for the Phoebus texture pack which allowed me learn the ropes of the game with relative understandability. Still, I understand where people are coming from just a little bit. Perhaps I'll try the ASCII again sometime now that I know what I'm doing for the most part.

[BoredVirulence]

When I first started playing, which was default vanilla, I had a bit of a hard time. It didn't help I opted for a tundra embark.

But once I got underground everything was fine. Of course a few miscilaneous objects baffled me, but looking(k) at them has a tendency to fix that. The only thing that bothers me is the rectangular nature of the default ascii. I've considered switching to another to fix that, but I'm not sure if its worth it, I've learned to deal with it pretty well.

In fact, coming from someone who didn't play any roguelikes, I find the ascii graphics a little endearing. There are some choices I don't agree with, but most are quite good. The matrix analogy/quote really is true. I don't see commas or periods, I see grass, trees, bronze armed dwarves thirsting for blood.

Edit: In my opinion, ascii graphics are a small part of the learning curve for DF. I've tried getting friends to play, even with the LNP. Personally I think its the controls that are most difficult, a long with so many things that will end your fort without a new player even knowing. I spent a few days adjusting to dwarf fortress before I was "fluent" enough to do anything meaningful, maybe an hour or two was because of the graphics, the rest was certainly menu's, mysterious deaths, and a little frustration from a lack of understanding.

[Swamper]

Just for your information, I dont really believe most people play Ascii... this is the layout for people playing my mod:

A subset of a subset.  The people who happened to vote in that poll MAY be representative of the larger group who plays a modded version of DF, but it's hard to argue that the layout prefs of mod players apply to the larger population of non-modded DF.

I'll echo many of the same sentiments as others in this thread. 

I'm a newer player I recently switched back to ASCII after trying out a DF distribution with preinstalled graphics.

The ASCII graphics seem to be the most efficient way to convey information into the place where most of the game takes place -- my mind/imagination.

"Small" things like the DFHack cursor fix that make the interface less "hostile" (as another poster here whose name I can't recall put it) are much more valuable to my gameplay experience.

[Putnam]

There is no single modding demographic, as far as I've seen; however, my data (Fortbent downloads) suggests that graphics are more popular there, too.

[denito]

I tried a graphics pack and the first time I opened a menu and the O's were wells or something I was like, oh hell no.  Might be an OCD thing; I'm also the sort of person who organizes M&M's by color...

[Musaab]

There are too many mistakes in the graphics packs for me that they eventually grate on me.

I actually started with tilesets and ended up switching to default ASCII and have never looked back.

[Ninjamestari]

I use the default graphics because I'm used to them.
Started playing DF in 40d like 3 years ago and didn't bother with graphics packs.
Also I was used to ASCII because of roguelikes.

[weenog]

I'm not picky about looks, and the main (only?) practical difference of tilesets is a negative one: some items and surfaces display incorrectly.

Expend extra effort to get a different look I don't care about and receive misleading information, or get a more accurate view by doing nothing at all? Not a difficult decision.

[Jordan~]

I've only played with graphics once or twice. I understand there have been some advances since then, but when I tried using graphics, the aforementioned problem of the same ASCII symbol being replaced by the same sprite spoiled it for me - I didn't like seeing goblins living in giant cabinets, etc.

As for Dwarf Therapist, I've never used it. When a migrant wave comes, I pause for each migrant. If they have a high skill that I need, all labours except that one are disabled and they become an Approved Metalsmith, Approved Carpenter, or whatever. Everyone else becomes a Labourer, Haulier or Citizen, depending on what sort of mood I'm in. The craft specialists do nothing but craft, everyone else does nothing but haul, the doctors do nothing but heal. Soldiers are recruited from the Labourers/Hauliers/Citizens and trained by experienced migrants. I guess my forts come to resemble a Soviet beehive.

[KingKaol]

I don't...I use Kelora 16x16 diagonal with a custom barrel icon
I don't like the graphics because they are too specific to one thing since the symbols are reused for so many different things and show up in text sometimes.

[Rose]

I only play in ascii, however, when I want to see what my fortress looks like in all it's glory, Ascii can't hold a candle to this and this.

[Triaxx2]

Actually, if you look closely at the little dwarf icons in vanilla, they do have beards. Honestly, the only thing that still bothers me about Vanilla is pump direction. I have trouble remembering that the light green one is the in take when I'm placing them.

I do use Dwarf Therapist now. I didn't all through 31.25, but when I updated to 34.11, I figured I'd try it. I wish I had long before.

[KtosoX]

tl;dr: Graphic packs can't help but fall short on this particular graphics engine. I find this annoying, so I prefer a more abstract representation that isn't constantly reminding me how ugly it is.

I'm a bit too young to be an old-time roguelike player and had never played ASCII games before DF. However, once I got used to the ASCII, I find the graphic packs too explicit and downright ugly. I prefer abstract symbols that let my imagination fill in the gaps rather than an attempt at graphics that could never live up to its name (due to the limitations the game imposes on graphics, not a lack of quality of the packs themselves).

That said, I don't use the default graphics. I use some or other square tileset such as Anikki's.

A similar thing happened to me with old 3D games (even when they were not old yet). If you look at an old game like Baldur's Gate, or classic Sierra adventure games, you can still find them aesthetically pleasing, and yet, if you look at more modern 3D games (but still old), such as Stronghold 2, you will find them lacking. That is because those 2D games, albeit older, are much more refined in the technique (or technology) they use, and in that sense are ahead of latter, early 3D games.

Great read, totally agree.

[minozake]

Actually, if you look closely at the little dwarf icons in vanilla, they do have beards. Honestly, the only thing that still bothers me about Vanilla is pump direction. I have trouble remembering that the light green one is the in take when I'm placing them.

Think "dark" as "opaque" and "blocking movement".  Think "light" as "transparent" and "allowing movement".  If a dwarf wanted to pump manually, where would they go?  To the transparent tile that allows movement.  If you needed to block fluid, what tile needs to be facing the water?  The opaque tile that blocks movement.

Hope that helps.

[Gnu]

The only thing I do is use square-ratio tilesets (I use my own based on the 8-bit Atari character sets) because it improves legibility and judging distances more quickly. Past that, I can't play with graphics packs because it makes working things out at a glance a lot more difficult, and TrueType support is still too wonky to be usable for me.

That said, I can't underestimate their importance in watering down the intimidation factor for new players. But they make the game a lot harder to play in the long run, and I also don't want to ever have to worry about running into trouble with edited raws.