Print

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

[Footkerchief]

There are many DF features with a poor signal-noise ratio.  Stone color is not the one I'd stake my argument on.

[cephalo]

I see what you're saying Abalieno, but I still think that stone variety is of particular importance, since so much of DF has to do with exploring underground and making things with the materials you find there. I do prefer finding natural materials to color my fort rather than just painting everything. In my last fort I had to import rutile and pitchblende for many years to make a big purple road for the royal areas. That kind of made it special.

Trying to find ways to add further mechanics to all this can be a kind of noise as well. I don't think it's needed in the case of stone.

[palu]

The stone colours match their colours in real life. That's why most of them in the game are grey. One of the times I donated to Toady he sent me a piece of microline with a note saying (paraphrasing now) "It really is that colour!"

You can ask toady for rocks? I know what I'm going to ask for.

[cephalo]

The stone colours match their colours in real life. That's why most of them in the game are grey. One of the times I donated to Toady he sent me a piece of microline with a note saying (paraphrasing now) "It really is that colour!"

You can ask toady for rocks? I know what I'm going to ask for.

Awe man! I would love to have a piece of microcline from Toady. I hope he's been stocking up on microcline!

[Urist McWangchuck]

Hey look at my user number!

Maybe when 0.63.01 comes out I too can be a ranting curmudgeon, but for now I'm still shiny and naive and have that new-Urist-smell.  Want to know my perspective?  Probably not, but here it is anyways.

It's an alpha.  Apparently one that is going to run a significant fraction of a century.  That is frigging awesome.  There's an engaged mod community that cobbles together awesome stuff for this game - apparently just out of love for it.  And I can see why.  If I knew more about modding I'd be sorely tempted to join them.  I consider the DF community part of the game - how could you not?

As a newbie, I play with graphics packs and Manipulator (but not Therapist for some odd reason) and really have trouble understanding the core "vanilla" game.  Utilities and graphics packs certainly make the game more accessible to me.  Using the unmodded interface is really tough.  That said, I am struggling along with DF 2014.

As someone else mentioned, 0.34.11 is stable and all the existing mods and utilities work on it.  As a newbie, I know I've barely scratched the surface of the game and have really only gotten to the part where I can get to a stable fortress under minimal !FUN! conditions.  And I have a couple of them that I'm feeling pretty good about right now.  Playing 0.34.11 has immense draw for me right now.  But I am still struggling along with this latest release.

Because omg, all the new stuff is too damn exciting.  Pulling up a dwarf's thoughts for example.  I did that for the first time in 0.34 and I knew right away that I had found a unique and truly amazing game.  I was astounded and flabbergasted.  When I do it now...  Just wow. 

That the outpost liason brings news and rumours of world events - ones being simulated in the world you're playing in - ones being impacted by your interactions with it.  omg.  Even at this rudimentary bug-filled stage, this is more meaningful and effective world interaction than any other game I can think of at the moment, although I guess it's a pretty subjective metric.

I am frigging hyped about 0.40.  Even though it's mostly unplayable for me right now (and yet I'm still playing it!) because I expect the utilities to get updated and probably significantly expanded upon.  That tree canopies will get sorted out in various graphics packs.  That bug squashing will progress and more and more stable and optimized releases will follow.  I am truly bewildered at the idea that anyone who plays DF isn't tingling with anticipation and agog at the possibilities right now.  Really.

Maybe that's the problem.  The new versions bring about a staggering amount of promise but never live up to it.  I dunno, I have not been around for even a significant fraction of a release cycle.  But hearing that this game used to be 2-D and seeing how integrated multiple z-levels are in the versions I've played - my enthusiasm is not dulled.

Here, let me lend you a pigtail bag full of innocence and deconstruct some of those constructed jade(d) pillars.  Dwarf Fortress is still totally awesome and this new release is so full of amazing, birds are literally falling out of the sky (and exploding into pulpy masses) over it.

Edit: clarification, punctuation and typos.

[Abalieno]

There are many DF features with a poor signal-noise ratio.  Stone color is not the one I'd stake my argument on.

Oh, I agree. It's just an example as I said, and I'm sure there are plenty better ones. But I could also convince you it is kind of a big deal.

If you never heard about DF and look up a screenshot the very common reaction is about going cross-eyed at the huge amount of ASCII characters and colors. So where I do see patterns, the average guy just sees unreadable noise and wonders how the hell anyone can actually play (and enjoy) that mess.

For MOST potential players this is a barrier that just can't be passed, or that isn't worthwhile to pass.

If instead color codes where more strictly limited to functionality (and tiles force this in some ways) then even ASCII would look FAR more readable.

Because the problem here isn't strictly the use of ASCII, but how they are used. Go find a "bed" in a big room where every single tile is a different color and ASCII. Go find a dwarf in a huge screen.

So, those stone types color are the SINGLE element that adds onscreen the biggest amount of noise. It's simply a fact that if you got rid of it the whole screen would suddenly look far more readable and usable at a glance. It's the same as looking for a small object in a tidy room, and look for the same tiny object in a room full of clutter.

[mnjiman]

blah blah blah blah.

[Abalieno]

I see what you're saying Abalieno, but I still think that stone variety is of particular importance, since so much of DF has to do with exploring underground and making things with the materials you find there. I do prefer finding natural materials to color my fort rather than just painting everything. In my last fort I had to import rutile and pitchblende for many years to make a big purple road for the royal areas. That kind of made it special.

...Yes. The problem here is that it's such a superfluous argument that is still kind of complex to analyze.

Ideally, I'd have all types in the game, but what I complained about is that when you put something in, you ALSO, OBLIGATORILY need to stand up for mechanics. So, give me all the materials, but then also model them in intuitive ways, instead of making the variety irrelevant or cosmetic. Mechanics should come first and ALONG the rest. Otherwise you only produce very messy game design that you have to study on a wiki since it's impossible to convey information through the game itself (since it doesn't mechanically works as it should).

If you build an house out of sand, in the real world, I doubt you still find it in the morning. If you make a game, and decide to add "sand" as a material to build a house, then I PRETEND that you also model its behavior. Otherwise avoid adding sand if you can't make sand what IT IS.

It's a small thing, but that multiplied for the myriad of DF building blocks makes for something that is IMPOSSIBLE to play because you can never predict how something works (without again studying the wiki).

The perfect, most fun Dwarf Fortress is the game where you go in without a clue, and learn right from the game, because the game is mechanically consistent and delivers its information in intuitive ways.

But nope. The feature creep I criticize led DF to be a game that you HAVE to study on the wiki, because it's built of caveats and exceptions (and often bugs and placeholders, which are fine since it's not "complete").

Trying to find ways to add further mechanics to all this can be a kind of noise as well. I don't think it's needed in the case of stone.

When mechanics are intuitive (aka: stuff made of sand doesn't last long, it rains and it's gone) they aren't noise.

[Footkerchief]

If you build an house out of sand, in the real world, I doubt you still find it in the morning. If you make a game, and decide to add "sand" as a material to build a house, then I PRETEND that you also model its behavior. Otherwise avoid adding sand if you can't make sand what IT IS.

Sand already has an important mechanical difference -- you can make glass from it.

[cephalo]

Man, most of us have been at this thread allll day long! Go to bed! Obviously were all pretty excited about the new release.

[Arbinire]

Wow, so this topic is still a thing...

...Yes. The problem here is that it's such a superfluous argument that is still kind of complex to analyze.

su·per·flu·ous
[soo-pur-floo-uhs] Show IPA
adjective
1.
being more than is sufficient or required; excessive.
2.
unnecessary or needless.
3.
Obsolete . possessing or spending more than enough or necessary; extravagant.

This pretty much describes EVERY stance the OP has argued...My question to you is, since we're calling spades spades, what makes you more important than all the other people who have made topics similar to this one?  What separates your argument from every other "the game NEEDS new UI NOW!  Otherwise people will hate the game and you wont make the moneys!" post that has been made?  What makes you so special that it's no longer a superfluous argument and that you deserve to have a different answer and your demands met?  Because the way you have gone about things, you sure seem to think you're something special and that your opinion holds more weight than anyone else's, including the man who created the game himself.

[sal880612m]

I see what you're saying Abalieno, but I still think that stone variety is of particular importance, since so much of DF has to do with exploring underground and making things with the materials you find there. I do prefer finding natural materials to color my fort rather than just painting everything. In my last fort I had to import rutile and pitchblende for many years to make a big purple road for the royal areas. That kind of made it special.

...Yes. The problem here is that it's such a superfluous argument that is still kind of complex to analyze.

Ideally, I'd have all types in the game, but what I complained about is that when you put something in, you ALSO, OBLIGATORILY need to stand up for mechanics. So, give me all the materials, but then also model them in intuitive ways, instead of making the variety irrelevant or cosmetic. Mechanics should come first and ALONG the rest. Otherwise you only produce very messy game design that you have to study on a wiki since it's impossible to convey information through the game itself (since it doesn't mechanically works as it should).

If you build an house out of sand, in the real world, I doubt you still find it in the morning. If you make a game, and decide to add "sand" as a material to build a house, then I PRETEND that you also model its behavior. Otherwise avoid adding sand if you can't make sand what IT IS.

It's a small thing, but that multiplied for the myriad of DF building blocks makes for something that is IMPOSSIBLE to play because you can never predict how something works (without again studying the wiki).

The perfect, most fun Dwarf Fortress is the game where you go in without a clue, and learn right from the game, because the game is mechanically consistent and delivers its information in intuitive ways.

But nope. The feature creep I criticize led DF to be a game that you HAVE to study on the wiki, because it's built of caveats and exceptions (and often bugs and placeholders, which are fine since it's not "complete").

Trying to find ways to add further mechanics to all this can be a kind of noise as well. I don't think it's needed in the case of stone.

When mechanics are intuitive (aka: stuff made of sand doesn't last long, it rains and it's gone) they aren't noise.

I think there is a difference the stones do behave differently and while Toady may not have settled on a mechanics difference that you value he did make them different in ways that he thinks matters. That you think it isn't different doesn't really matter, so at this point your whole argument has basically become totally invalid and entirely self-serving as far as I can tell.
Anyways I'm out, done, finito. Go scream at a wall.

[Abalieno]

Oh well, I HATE when I'm being completely misunderstood.

I'll try to sum up what this thread is for me.

- I love ASCII, I absolutely love to noisy look of characters and colors. In fact I also love the most specifically noisy and esoteric tileset ever produced for DF: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=60176.15
- I'd never trade DF 2006 for DF 2014, because I personally prefer much more the simulation aspect to the free sandbox/godmode.

The first chunk of my original post wasn't to explain that DF 2006 was better. When I do an analysis of something I try to make it complete, THEN I add my point of view.

That DF 2006 had a particular charm and game design style that DF 2014 lost is a FACT. Yet it doesn't reflect my preference, it's just analysis.

So why I brought that up? Because past that point DF also fell to the bad kind of "feature creep" (of which the stone colors is just an example).

This post was made with one objective: give Toady arguments to consider how he develops the game, and, now, take time to REFOCUS.

Because, along the years, the feature creep made DF extremely patchy, buggy, filled with systems that only half work, incomplete features and a whole lot of crap signal to noise ratio.

HENCE: please take a break from adding SIGNIFICANT FEATURES, and go back, for an extended period, to POLISH THINGS UP.

Because, imho, DF is now at a point where it's rather badly broken and inconsistent. Not just because of the latest release, but because the MAJORITY of the systems that needed love have been neglected along the years, to add major features.

So, please stop for a while adding major features so that the game can be reorganized into something that *makes sense*, instead of just a mess that is more and more broken as time passes and only becomes just a wacky experiment of computer art.

Can we agree on this?

[Xangi]

If you need 10 pages of clarification on your point perhaps you should actually examine it to make sure it is even comprehensible. I've seen scientific journals with less explanation.

Also this thread should be locked, it's going nowhere.

[Abalieno]

Man, most of us have been at this thread allll day long! Go to bed!

I just got up and fired up Vim to do some actual coding on some different roguelike, so I have some time

In any case, I only try to reply to clarify the various arguments already in the original post. I try hard to not derail into different stuff.

The post was simply trying to persuade Toady that a full polish pass is needed now, before DF really breaks apart completely. And for a bunch of people it's already past that point, most likely.