Print

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

[BoredVirulence]

I'm just going to make a note, the graph that you hate so much was never made by DF fans, it was originally for Eve Online if I remember correctly. Blame them, someone just hijacked it for DF, and it makes all the more sense for it.

Also I would point out that the graph does have a mistake, but its not the mistake you think it is.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Look at the graph's Y axis. Its not a learning curse, the graph's title is misleading wrong. Its a completely different graph. If anything, its a function of how difficult the game is at any given point, and its purpose has little to do with learning, and really just shows the rate of change of difficulty.

If you want to create great debates about semantics, get them straight. You are correct about learning curves, this graph is mislabeled as one, and that is its fault. Of course the technical definition of a learning curve is behind the curve with the rest of the population. English is a whore of a language, and simply evolves with no direction. I agree that certain evolution's should be culled at infancy such as the dreaded "selfie," but that hardly changes the nature of the language.

[Orange Wizard]

English is a whore of a language

As in, English is the metaphorical "dumpster" for all the slimy muck other languages left her with?

[DVNO]

Do you see what happens when you don't feed the nerds releases, Toady One? This is what happens! >:C

[catpaw]

Man, are you guys and gals still debating this?

[Dyret]

Of course they are... it's one of the great philosophical questions of our age!

[knaveightt]

I would like to contribute with a proposal for an ENTIRELY NEW GRAPH measuring the amount of impact the graph of DF's learning curve and its correctness has on the incredible sophistication of such an amazing piece of software:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Didn't even need ms paint.

EDIT: May be applicable for this "nerd cred" of which was spoken.

[forsaken1111]

Can we graph how correct various people have been in this debate over the time the debate has run?

[Matt_S]

This thread could have died with some dignity left.  But there's no sense talking about hypotheticals.  I could make a graph that plots skill on the x axis and effort spent on the y axis and call it a learning curve, and DF would have a steep learning curve.  Yeah, that's not how psychologists do it, but I don't particularly care.

And if I could briefly and hypocritically be a pedant: this side note about thermodynamic entropy is amusing to me, for a couple of reasons.  The concept of entropy originated in thermodynamics, and both the colloquial and mathematical definitions come from thermodynamics.  Thermodynamic entropy is Shannon entropy from mathematics*.  Thermodynamic entropy is the entropy for whatever system you're observing, so talking about thermodynamic entropy vs other entropy like they're fundamentally different makes me raise my eyebrows.  Also, I giggle whenever I see the second "law" of thermodynamics.

*Okay, for systems with continuous degrees of freedom it's a generalization of Shannon entropy.  Oh yeah, and there's a Boltzmann constant in there for no good reason.

[GavJ]

but I don't particularly care.

I wasn't aware that simply not caring whether you're wrong made you not wrong. Apparently science is a lot cheaper and easier than everybody thought. We don't need to invest billions and toil for years to unlock the world's secrets. For any given mystery, we just need to flip a coin to choose an answer, not care if the result is wrong, and then... it won't be wrong! Just distribute literal quarters instead of quarters of millions in funding grants.  It's brilliant!

talking about thermodynamic entropy vs other entropy like they're fundamentally different makes me raise my eyebrows.

All due respect to your eyebrows, entropy means "measure of [insert specific specialized type of] disorder" in a lot of scientific circles. Not as a colloquialism. As official, well-defined jargon in a wide variety of fields. From computer science to statistics to neuroscience, I've seen it all over the place with very specific meanings.  It is not only thermodynamics. Hence the addition of an adverb now when referring to the thermodynamic variety (if out of any clear context of thermodynamics), in order to not confuse everyone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_(disambiguation)

[Playergamer]

Jeez, lern 2 strawman. No one was saying caring made them right, they were saying. this argument wasn't worth having.

((This isn't a scientific discussion, GavJ. This is about semantics.))

[GavJ]

Jeez, lern 2 strawman. No one was saying caring made them right, they were saying. this argument wasn't worth having.

People say lots of things. In this case, the things you're suggesting can't be true, because if a dude posts in a thread, he necessarily MUST think it's worth talking about. Because, guess what? He's talking about it.

Therefore I ignore that part and am responding to what his actual opinion appears to be. I have to guess what that is, though, so if I guessed wrong, he is welcome to restate his actual argument more clearly, and I will try again.

(unless he now truly does not care, in which case he will just not respond. Which is cool too. I'm getting a bit tired of the thread, whatever)

[FrankMcFuzz]

Truly GavJ is Socrates with a keyboard. Also I got confused so here's a dog.

d

[varnish]

Lies. That is clearly a deer.

[GavJ]

A gray d is a drunian, man! I just encountered one the other day, and.... actually it was pretty uneventful.

[Button]

Jeez, lern 2 strawman. No one was saying caring made them right, they were saying. this argument wasn't worth having.

People say lots of things. In this case, the things you're suggesting can't be true, because if a dude posts in a thread, he necessarily MUST think it's worth talking about. Because, guess what? He's talking about it.

Or what he cares about is not the topic of the conversation, but the fact that someone is getting their boxers in a bunch on the internet.

Everybody's got their pet peeves, man. Feel free to express them when they come up. But making a new thread just to rant about a comic that's been out for years is just - it's not appropriate.

The entire Dwarf Fortress community doesn't need to be alerted that someone (else)'s joke graph, which has been around for years, doesn't accurately/actually present a learning curve. Just like no one on a tea forum needs my rant about how "herbal tea" is a misnomer since tisanes marketed as "herbal teas" don't have tea in them and, in most cases, aren't even made out of herbs according to the botanical definition.

It doesn't matter. No one cares but the person complaining. And other people talking about it doesn't mean they care about the topic of your rant - what they care about is that you're stinking up the forum with your twisted knickers.