Print

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

[laularukyrumo]

Eh. I don't exactly approve of making a side jab at "videogame purists" (whatever the fuck that means), but I do have to agree, the in-game labor manager is nineteen different levels of premium grade shit. Just the simple fact that in-game you have no way to know how many guys are assigned a particular labor is bad enough--and before anyone mentions the [z] stocks screen, no, that doesn't count, since it categorizes dwarves by their highest skill, and not what labors they have enabled. A legendary Fish Dissector with no labors enabled other than mining would be listed as a fish dissector, which is clearly not his de facto profession.

Though I do agree that narcissists other than me should be punched in the face.

[Loud Whispers]

It's the same reason. Narcissism.

Go purists =! We're better than you because we prefer vanilla.

[TimeTurtle]

I have a bad habit of making new worlds regularly so it shouldn't be a big problem for me.

I'm gonna make an adventurer, gather up a posse and go sack a goblin fortress. Been wanting to do that for years.

[Mesa]

I'm playing the game pure vanilla - who needs tilesets or Therapist? (NOTE: I don't play Fortress mode)
Purists ftw.

[mross]

Purists ftw.

Why?

[Boltgun]

Playing the way you like ftw as I quote : "Fun need no explanation, FUN admit none."

[Loud Whispers]

Purists ftw.

Why?

For those who enjoy pure vanilla.

[HmH]

Purists ftw.

Why?

1) Playing without external tools is more challenging.

2) Dwarf Therapist usually takes quite some time to update when new versions come out. Without waiting for it, one can start playing the newest version immediately rather than six days and three bug-fixing updates later.

3) Dwarf Therapist looks out-of-place with its white background and non-pixelated fonts and other newfangled thingamabobs. As you have said, DF's interface belongs in a museum, and some like the way it looks.

4) Some people, like me, have attention disorders and are prone to information overload. Seeing a huge table with lots of blue and white and blue-white thingies that detail a crapload of data can be rather frustrating for them.
Also, they may need to constantly trace rows and columns with their fingers in order to make sure they are reading the table correctly, which is pretty annoying all by itself.

5) Some of us have played DF since before Dwarf Therapist has come to light. We have built up a tolerance for the inefficiency of most forts.

[mross]

1) Playing without external tools is more challenging.

Challenge is not intrinsically desirable a priori. Also, interface challenge is false challenge.

2) Dwarf Therapist usually takes quite some time to update when new versions come out. Without waiting for it, one can start playing the newest version immediately rather than six days and three bug-fixing updates later.

Wow, six whole days! If I didn't have a job, I might notice.

3) Dwarf Therapist looks out-of-place with its white background and non-pixelated fonts and other newfangled thingamabobs. As you have said, DF's interface belongs in a museum, and some like the way it looks.

Dwarf Fortress looks out of place with its needlessly archaic UI components. Personal preference has nothing to do with it: an interface has one job, facilitation. DF's UI does the opposite. Therefore, it is a bad interface. Bad design is not dependent on the observer, and aesthetic appeal is not a goal of interface design (although the UI fails at this as well, so that wouldn't be an excuse anyway).

4) Some people, like me, have attention disorders and are prone to information overload. Seeing a huge table with lots of blue and white and blue-white thingies that detail a crapload of data can be rather frustrating for them.

Actually, tables organize information and make it easier to read. If you have difficulty reading something as simple and basic as a DT table, please sue your public school system.

Also, they may need to constantly trace rows and columns with their fingers in order to make sure they are reading the table correctly, which is pretty annoying all by itself.

Clicking on a heading highlights that row or column, eliminating this problem. This is called good interface design.

5) Some of us have played DF since before Dwarf Therapist has come to light. We have built up a tolerance for the inefficiency of most forts.

This is literally the worst possible argument for not improving the interface's design. The interface continues to be terrible regardless of your feelings about it or ability to cope with its terribleness.

Also, there's no reason we can't have a "legacy ui" option and have it both ways.

[Putnam]

And I thought Neonivek was excessively negative!

[HmH]

Are you intentionally trying to be antagonistic, mross?

You asked 'why?', and I have given you my views on why purists will exist despite your opinion of them.
I never intended to defend these views because making you into a purist was not my goal; rather, it was to explain that there are other people than you on these forums.
If you're so set on hating purists for no reason other than "they're not me", it's your choice. I'm not going to argue with you, as I see no value in changing your opinion.

[i2amroy]

Are you intentionally trying to be antagonistic, mross?

Pretty much. A check of his recent posts points to obvious trollish behavior. I recommend a strong dose of shunning to cure it.

[Eric Blank]

Consider it done.

Upon the day of release we will all revel in glorious new features! And immediately try to find ways to kill people with them. I'm wondering just how I can to make climbing lethal to anybody but the one climbing. Maybe NPCs will path off cliffs you're hanging off of, or you can jump up out of their way when they charge into said cliff, stunning them, and then drop something heavy and sharp on them.

[mross]

Are you intentionally trying to be antagonistic, mross?

You asked 'why?', and I have given you my views on why purists will exist despite your opinion of them.
I never intended to defend these views because making you into a purist was not my goal; rather, it was to explain that there are other people than you on these forums.
If you're so set on hating purists for no reason other than "they're not me", it's your choice. I'm not going to argue with you, as I see no value in changing your opinion.

Completely missing the point.

This isn't about whether purists have the right to exist. It's about tribalism.

[Loud Whispers]

This isn't about whether purists have the right to exist. It's about tribalism.

So you're just going to make the sole derogatory statement without backing anything up? At all? Not even once an explanation? Though to be fair it is to be expected, you do seem less interested in criticizing the game or the forum and more so interested in derailing threads in boorish ways.