Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic: DF License query  (Read 3868 times)

krige

  • Bay Watcher
  • [TILE:dwarf:fire]
    • View Profile
Re: DF License query
« Reply #15 on: November 16, 2006, 03:34:00 am »

*waves an ADOM flag*
*gets shot*

Interesting discussion otherwise.

[ November 16, 2006: Message edited by: krige ]

Logged
Sheriff of Nottingham: That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, and call off Christmas.

Edwin

  • Escaped Lunatic
    • View Profile
Re: DF License query
« Reply #16 on: November 16, 2006, 07:09:00 am »

Cheers Toady for reading and understanding what I meant!

I'm still a bit unsure what you mean by this

quote:

It really does have to come down to the value of keeping the source closed to my brother and I, personally (and I'm not speaking for him in this post).

And I hope that one day you do release it.

Logged

Citizen of Erl

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: DF License query
« Reply #17 on: November 16, 2006, 07:18:00 am »

Accuracy is fun!

I was sad to learn that ADOM had a crash bug from charactre creation, just for taking a certain skill. And that the creator has been sitting on it for years now. =[

Although being able to gte negative gold in ADOM is fun, too.

Logged

krige

  • Bay Watcher
  • [TILE:dwarf:fire]
    • View Profile
Re: DF License query
« Reply #18 on: November 16, 2006, 07:30:00 am »

quote:
Originally posted by Citizen of Erl:
<STRONG>Accuracy is fun!

I was sad to learn that ADOM had a crash bug from charactre creation, just for taking a certain skill. And that the creator has been sitting on it for years now. =[

Although being able to gte negative gold in ADOM is fun, too.</STRONG>


*his last post on ADOM topic*
TB isn't working on ADOM anymore... From what I understand, he's devoted to JADE now.
Negative gold is possible a reasonable amount of time only in when you do the double gold dragon exploit. And Skilled wouldn't be useful, anyway. I dislike Nethack since the inclusion of Sokoban-like levels.

[ November 16, 2006: Message edited by: krige ]

Logged
Sheriff of Nottingham: That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, and call off Christmas.

axus

  • Bay Watcher
  • Axe Murderer
    • View Profile
Re: DF License query
« Reply #19 on: November 16, 2006, 01:33:00 pm »

Nethack is still under development, and ADOM is not.  That's a good reason to ask for open source.  But, Dwarf Fortress is under heavy development.  From the point of view of wanting new features, open source doesn't matter right now.

I can understand Toady's motivations... its fair to want to make some money from it someday.  Also, there's personal pride in completing something by yourself, without programming help.  And when something isn't complete yet, you want to finish it before letting people see how it works.

If you really can't wait for an open source DF, then write up a design document and code one yourself.  If only I had more time :-D

Logged

karnot

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: DF License query
« Reply #20 on: November 16, 2006, 04:22:00 pm »

quote:
Nethack is still under development

Any proof ?
Logged

lumin

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: DF License query
« Reply #21 on: November 16, 2006, 06:26:00 pm »

quote:
    quote: Nethack is still under development


Any proof ?


Well according to this site, ver. 3.4.3 was released back in Dec of 2003.  Also, according to here 3.4.2 was released in August of 2003.  So I guess you could say it has been quiet for a while.  So even open-sourcing doesn't mean a project will stay alive.  

Toady One is like a young NBA player.  He loves to play, still has a lot of good years left, and hasn't peaked out on his salary possibilities.  So why would he want to quit his job now to become a coach?  He'd rather be in the thick of development rather than supervising from the sidelines.

Logged

Aquillion

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: DF License query
« Reply #22 on: November 19, 2006, 02:24:00 pm »

quote:
Originally posted by karnot:
<STRONG>
Only by force of habit. I cant see how my example cant stand up.</STRONG>
BS.  I'm not even a fan of Nethack, and I think that's a stupid thing to say.  Nethack is huge.  There is more content in it than a one-man project like ADOM could ever hope to contain.  Just because the lion's share of this content is put in in 'subtle' ways that only show up through multiple playthroughs and under the right circumstances doesn't change the fact that it the vastly, vastly deeper game of the two by any reasonable measure.

And I'm not really such a fan of ADOM either.  I played it a little bit, and I do agree that it's fun to play once or twice, maybe play through once for each class...  but I don't see how it manages to hold anyone's interest after that.  It just railroads the player too much...  Every class has a list of preset abilities that they will always get, all the important portions of the world are predefined into a set shape, and the carefully-plotted quest that was so lovingly worked into the game becomes a meaningless distraction after you've played through a few times and know absolutely everything about it.  There's a reason why most roguelikes don't go too hard on a hard-and-fast plot, you know.  I think, almost, that Biskup was going for the next Diablo when he made the game...  in fact, I think he actually describes it as such in one of his promotional pieces.  That's fine; Diablo has plenty of fans.  But claiming that a game built on that model is objectively better than Nethack is stupid.  Different, maybe, but in most of the categories that people like about Nethack, at least, ADOM doesn't even try to compete.

Although I'm actually not, as I said, such a fan of either game...  in my mind they both tend to encourage 'twinking', they both have too many things that are always the same between playthroughs, they both lack interesting magic, both force every character to go through the same areas to collect the same ritual-items, both have a similarly annoying and shallowly-implemented conception of religion with cookie-cutter gods, and both share numerous other flaws.

My personal favorite roguelike (outside Dwarf Fortress, which is incomplete and too different to compare anyway) is Dungeon Crawl, which merits particular mention here.  Dungeon Crawl isn't overflowing with things.  It has, you might say, exactly the right amount of things.  It has a hokey feel that exactly matches the gameplay--it never tries to make you feel that getting the Orb of Zot is part of a valient effort to save the world from the rising tide of foof because, let's face it, after (at most) the first playthrough nobody cares anyway.  It gives the player near-complete control over how their character develops, allowing them to change direction at any point.  It has huge numbers of interesting spells, and divides them up into countless schools so that magic-users can actually be different from each other.  It lets the player make choices about which runes they collect on each playthrough, giving them a chance to see new areas and make more decisions about their character.  It has an interesting conception of religion that makes prayer more than a get-out-of-jail-free card that occasionally dispurses free items, and which actually establishes real gameplay differences between the gods.  It is extremely well-balanced, with no exploitive behaviors or silly tricks that you can get from a FAQ.  It feels smooth to me in a way that Nethack and ADOM never did...  I can't think of any better way to explain it.

...and, well, I went on for too long.  But, anyway, the point is that Crawl did all this while being open-source.  Most of the actual work was done by one person, Linley, which is probably the reason why it all feels so smooth; and since he didn't know much coding when he started the source was left in a state that made it very hard for others to expand on, but that didn't hurt him.  It's not like having open-source code is going to cause people to force things into the game.

...but, like Toady says, it really comes down to his personal feelings.  It might not make as big a difference as all that, anyway; the main branch that everyone cares about would always be his, and with everything so clearly planned-out it's not clear what other people could add to that.

Logged
We don't want another cheap fantasy universe, we want a cheap fantasy universe generator. --Toady One

DimmurWyrd

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: DF License query
« Reply #23 on: November 19, 2006, 03:26:00 pm »

I think the main argument against nethack is that if you really play it a lot you end up going "gag me" too often because it's just a mishmash of anything anyone ever thought of thrown in there with no real controls or vision at all... too many bad puns and just dingy things (spork +5 anyone? watch out for jabba's big butt!!!)

There ARE some VERY nice versions of nethack out there that have most of the worst goof removed but some of them are just too silly (not that that is BAD per se just that there can be TOO MUCH of it.)

I love DF because it has some goofiness but most of it is just because of how things roll out not because it's forced in there artificially... dwarves don't do stupid things on purpose they just sometimes do them lol... being attacked by rabid wookies would NOT help the game but I bet it'd happen in at least one version if the game was open source  ;)

Mostly I respect the desire to keep it "in the family" until it's done simply because Toady doesn't need to be here fielding complaints on variants he isn't even working on and hasn't seen in a year or more etc. He's got enough work to do keeping up with the one he's doing himself.

Logged

karnot

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: DF License query
« Reply #24 on: November 19, 2006, 04:04:00 pm »

quote:
There is more content in it than a one-man project like ADOM could ever hope to contain.

BS.

quote:
he fact that it the vastly, vastly deeper game of the two by any reasonable measure.  

BS.

quote:
 It feels smooth to me in a way that Nethack and ADOM never did... I can't think of any better way to explain it.

Thats because DC is in a different category from ADoM, DC is just an office time killer, thats all. A small game which you play if you have 10 free minutes. Which is good enough, if it doesnt try to pose as something greater (and it doesnt).

[ November 19, 2006: Message edited by: karnot ]

Logged

Bask

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: DF License query
« Reply #25 on: November 20, 2006, 09:31:00 am »

ADOM's only good thing is the plot and monster memory system (a modification of Angband's). DV and PV as separate stats are nice too. But it's buggy, lacks depth and gets repetitive faster than any other roguelike (including roguelikes with plot like Zangband and Omega).

It might be a question of taste, but roguelikes generally are about intricacies of gameplay - tactical options in Angband, item interaction in Nethack, combat and magic system in Crawl. I don't see that special depth in ADOM. Yes, the world is huge and epic, but to say it's objectively better than Nethack... Sorry.

And Crawl seems like a 10 minute game only because it's hard to survive even until the tenmple, so you don't see most of the features - I mean: Abyss, Labyrinths, Lair, Tartarus and the silliness that is Zot. BTW - stone_soup 0.1.3 is out, try it.

Logged

krige

  • Bay Watcher
  • [TILE:dwarf:fire]
    • View Profile
Re: DF License query
« Reply #26 on: November 20, 2006, 09:39:00 am »

(uhhhh.... can you people stop flaming already?)
Logged
Sheriff of Nottingham: That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, and call off Christmas.

lumin

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: DF License query
« Reply #27 on: November 20, 2006, 04:58:00 pm »

I know Dwarf Fortress is in a category of its own, but I think that it will be bigger and better than both Nethack and ADOM.

The great thing about this project is that it is quasi Open-Source already.  Toady checks these forums for suggestions and bugs so often and so diligently that community made ideas are constantly being put into the game.  He is simply filtering out the lame content/ideas that DID get into Nethack.  If the system aint broken, don't fix it.

Logged

Capntastic

  • Bay Watcher
  • Greetings, mortals!
    • View Profile
    • A review and literature weblog I never update
Re: DF License query
« Reply #28 on: November 20, 2006, 06:08:00 pm »

quote:
Originally posted by krige:
<STRONG>(uhhhh.... can you people stop flaming already?)</STRONG>

Discussion of other games and how they compare to DF in terms of scope and complexity may be off topic, but it's not flaming.

I trust that when the time comes, Toady will decide if he should release source code or not.  Giving reasons as to why he should or shouldn't amounts to nothing over the great thought he is sure to put into the decision- after all, DF is his creation.

Logged

krige

  • Bay Watcher
  • [TILE:dwarf:fire]
    • View Profile
Re: DF License query
« Reply #29 on: November 21, 2006, 03:45:00 am »

quote:
Originally posted by Capntastic:
<STRONG>

Discussion of other games and how they compare to DF in terms of scope and complexity may be off topic, but it's not flaming.
</STRONG>


But responding with merely "BS" is.

Logged
Sheriff of Nottingham: That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, and call off Christmas.
Pages: 1 [2] 3