Print

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

[reality.auditor]

Fixing it would be nice, but would require almost constant overhaul going forward, so it should be done later.

Uhhh... no. New UI would require as much "constant overhaul going forward" as it is going with current UI. In other words, none at all.

if Toady were to leave reasonable hooks in the game so that people could bolt on outside interfaces and graphics until they're satisfied.

Unfortunately, Toady does not want even API. Most probably, he do not want any Stonesense-DF hybrid that would most certainly ensue in this case.

[Putnam]

Fixing it would be nice, but would require almost constant overhaul going forward, so it should be done later.

Uhhh... no. New UI would require as much "constant overhaul going forward" as it is going with current UI. In other words, none at all.

Why? Because when Toady rewrites the current one, all future UIs he writes will be magically user-friendly?

[reality.auditor]

Uhhh... no. New UI would require as much "constant overhaul going forward" as it is going with current UI. In other words, none at all.

Why? Because when Toady rewrites the current one, all future UIs he writes will be magically user-friendly?

Nope. Because after rewrite, he would left it for at least few years and use new UI. Like, you know, he is using current UI without "constant overhaul". I do not know what is so hard to understand about it.

"It will require constant work on" argument is basically variant of "It cannot be done perfectly, therefore it it not worth doing at all" argument. I cannot accept this kind of argument.

[Putnam]

Uhhh... no. New UI would require as much "constant overhaul going forward" as it is going with current UI. In other words, none at all.

Why? Because when Toady rewrites the current one, all future UIs he writes will be magically user-friendly?

Nope. Because after rewrite, he would left it for at least few years and use new UI. Like, you know, he is using current UI without "constant overhaul". I do not know what is so hard to understand about it.

I can't argue with this because I literally cannot understand what is being said here.

What does "he would left it for at least a few years and use new UI" mean?

[Elephant Parade]

Uhhh... no. New UI would require as much "constant overhaul going forward" as it is going with current UI. In other words, none at all.

Why? Because when Toady rewrites the current one, all future UIs he writes will be magically user-friendly?

Nope. Because after rewrite, he would left it for at least few years and use new UI. Like, you know, he is using current UI without "constant overhaul". I do not know what is so hard to understand about it.

I can't argue with this because I literally cannot understand what is being said here.

What does "he would left it for at least a few years and use new UI" mean?

...Maybe he means he would create a new UI after a few years? But wouldn't that just waste the work that would be put into creating a new UI?

[k33n]

The only thing terrible about dwarf fortress is the UI. The ASCII graphics actually work quite well and the text only descriptions are part of what makes the game magic. Every other aspect of the game is almost perfect for what it is.

But the UI is garbage. Despite what Tarn and some members of the community may suggest, the game HAS been released, and cannot even slightly be considered by any means an alpha. It needs UI work badly, possibly mouse functionality ( which is very simple to program considered Tarns displayed programming chops and the structure already in place ).

The game is basically playable because of community utilities, but man o man some native UI love would be very nice.

[k33n]

Uhhh... no. New UI would require as much "constant overhaul going forward" as it is going with current UI. In other words, none at all.

Why? Because when Toady rewrites the current one, all future UIs he writes will be magically user-friendly?

Nope. Because after rewrite, he would left it for at least few years and use new UI. Like, you know, he is using current UI without "constant overhaul". I do not know what is so hard to understand about it.

I can't argue with this because I literally cannot understand what is being said here.

What does "he would left it for at least a few years and use new UI" mean?

You can make a totally functional UI and not update it ever again except to add paths to new features that would be as complex to code as the current keyboard shortcuts are. It's a one time operation.

[WoobMonkey]

[snark] Interesting how advice on how to change a programmer's pet project is coming from someone who doesn't understand how to use the basic 'edit post' function, ubiquitous on nearly every forum. [/snark]

All flippancy aside, I think it well to remember that 'unplayable to me' does not equal 'unplayable in general.'  Unless you think that many of the players of this game are some sort of superhumans, that is.

You can make a totally functional UI and not update it ever again except to add paths to new features that would be as complex to code as the current keyboard shortcuts are. It's a one time operation.

Evidence, please.  It's much easier to assert this point, than to actually prove it.

[k33n]

[snark] Interesting how advice on how to change a programmer's pet project is coming from someone who doesn't understand how to use the basic 'edit post' function, ubiquitous on nearly every forum. [/snark]

All flippancy aside, I think it well to remember that 'unplayable to me' does not equal 'unplayable in general.'  Unless you think that many of the players of this game are some sort of superhumans, that is.

You can make a totally functional UI and not update it ever again except to add paths to new features that would be as complex to code as the current keyboard shortcuts are. It's a one time operation.

Evidence, please.  It's much easier to assert this point, than to actually prove it.

It just takes a beginners understanding in programming.

edit: not to code it, but to understand the grammer of programming. It is common sense after that.

[k33n]

duplicate

[Putnam]

The only thing terrible about dwarf fortress is the UI. The ASCII graphics actually work quite well and the text only descriptions are part of what makes the game magic. Every other aspect of the game is almost perfect for what it is.

But the UI is garbage. Despite what Tarn and some members of the community may suggest, the game HAS been released, and cannot even slightly be considered by any means an alpha. It needs UI work badly, possibly mouse functionality ( which is very simple to program considered Tarns displayed programming chops and the structure already in place ).

The game is basically playable because of community utilities, but man o man some native UI love would be very nice.

There is mouse functionality.

[k33n]

The only thing terrible about dwarf fortress is the UI. The ASCII graphics actually work quite well and the text only descriptions are part of what makes the game magic. Every other aspect of the game is almost perfect for what it is.

But the UI is garbage. Despite what Tarn and some members of the community may suggest, the game HAS been released, and cannot even slightly be considered by any means an alpha. It needs UI work badly, possibly mouse functionality ( which is very simple to program considered Tarns displayed programming chops and the structure already in place ).

The game is basically playable because of community utilities, but man o man some native UI love would be very nice.

There is mouse functionality.

It would just be nice if Tarn replaced the sidebar with a button class and changed the SDL_Events to poll for mouse events instead of key presses. Also the +/- and its discrepancies could be replaced with a scroll bar. A little polish.

[WoobMonkey]

It just takes a beginners understanding in programming.

edit: not to code it, but to understand the grammer of programming. It is common sense after that.

More assertions do not equal evidence.  Try not talking through your hat.  If it's common sense to understand the [sic] 'grammer' of programming, then what's preventing you, personally, from writing a new UI that suits your needs?

I'm not a programmer; but if all it takes is a [sic] 'beginners' understanding, then I'm sure we all look forward to your new, robust, user-friendly UI patch, coming up in the next few days.

Once again, evidence is meaningful; bald assertion is not.  If it's as easy as you say, it shouldn't be a problem for you to write the new UI.  After all, others have written programs to customize the DF experience, such as DFHack, Stonesense, Soundsense, etc. - why not add your own program to that illustrious list?

[k33n]

It just takes a beginners understanding in programming.

edit: not to code it, but to understand the grammer of programming. It is common sense after that.

More assertions do not equal evidence.  Try not talking through your hat.  If it's common sense to understand the [sic] 'grammer' of programming, then what's preventing you, personally, from writing a new UI that suits your needs?

I'm not a programmer; but if all it takes is a [sic] 'beginners' understanding, then I'm sure we all look forward to your new, robust, user-friendly UI patch, coming up in the next few days.

Once again, evidence is meaningful; bald assertion is not.  If it's as easy as you say, it shouldn't be a problem for you to write the new UI.  After all, others have written programs to customize the DF experience, such as DFHack, Stonesense, Soundsense, etc. - why not add your own program to that illustrious list?

You are embarrassing yourself with your thinly veiled rage and hysteria. Correct your ignorance about programming, I don't care.

[Putnam]

I have no ignorance about programming, at least on the level of C++. I don't know quite what you're talking about either, and he's right about bald assertions. Write a mock-up if you have to.

Believe it or not, Toady doesn't have much experience with SDL. Baughn is the one who does all that.