Print

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

[umiman]

Well... that's my point.

It's not a bad thing, don't get me wrong. Just that some of us just can't see past the lines and some of us do all the time. Just like some of us have wierd trippy, acid dreams every day and others have dreams of everyday life. It's a good thing when you do science and math, engineering and the like. (Since when I do math, I start wondering how powerful a BFG my 2 is using against sqrt(a).)

So for you, you might be playing this game for the sake of building and digging stuff and seeing how awesome your fortress overseeing ability is. In that sense, "real" graphics might work for you. For others, like me, we see it as a world unraveling and how lives are affected.

Unfortunately for you: Toady One creates this game based on the latter. Wherein he creates new items and developments based on the stories that he and his brother craft at night while not engaging in ... err... I mean based on the stories that he and his brother craft at night.

[Mike Mayday]

quote:Originally posted by Keilden:
<STRONG>Besides...think of the lag 3d graphics would cause if this game lags in ASCII.</STRONG>

Please allow me to repeat that an isometric sprite tileset would not increase the CPU strain in any way compared to what we have now.
I still think graphics should be the last thing to do. UI- not so much, but that's because I don't know if postponing the "un-hard-coding" doesn't make it more and more difficult to do, as new features are implemented with the hard coded UI in mind.

[Kayla]

quote:Originally posted by Mike Mayday:
<STRONG>
Please allow me to repeat that an isometric sprite tileset would not increase the CPU strain in any way compared to what we have now.
I still think graphics should be the last thing to do. UI- not so much, but that's because I don't know if postponing the "un-hard-coding" doesn't make it more and more difficult to do, as new features are implemented with the hard coded UI in mind.</STRONG>

I would like to also point out, that an isometric sprite tileset is NOT a 3D engine. Sure, while turning the game into isometric sprites wouldn't show much of an hardware hit, turning it into a full fledged 3D engine, like the person Mike was quoting was suggesting, would have a massive hit.

That being said, I personally would enjoy 3D more, rather then 2.5D Sprites (as in what you would get with isometric type stuff), simply because of the ease of randomizing. I suppose when some people here think of dwarves, they always think of them as the same size. I personally don't. Each dwarf, to my mind, looks different and individual. Some are taller, leaner, maybe more feminine, while some are shorter, burlier, kitty-killin machines. Either way, rigging a 2D system to be able to pull off 'individuality', would be a lot harder then its 3D counterpart, which if used effectively with a skeletal system, could achieve 'variance', without over-work.

All of that mentioned, I would rather wait until Toady is absolutely finished with all the possible features he could ever want in Dwarf Fortress, to implement anything even remotely synomynous with a 3D engine. Which, for anyone who knows better, pretty much means never. At least, to me.

Thats all I had to say.

Kayla.

Edit: In relevance of this post, I just realized Mike may have not been mislead into thinking that 3D equals isometric sprites, but was instead suggesting it as an alternative. If this is true, then I apologize for what will apparently be seen as some aggressiveness. That is all.

[ January 23, 2008: Message edited by: Kayla ]

[Mipe]

Beauty is in the imagination. DF forces/allows to use our imagination and that is why we love it.

However, DF is still limited on fundamental levels - its gameplay still restricts the imagination. I don't think it is the graphics, as we can easily work around them with the imagination.

But that flaw is being worked on; DF is in an alpha and its gameplay will increasingly become complex, expanding the horizon of possibilities.

Insert more babbling here.

[Telltolin]

I too like imagination and all that fruity bullshit, but I also see a big problem with graphics and a game like DF. If toady did the graphics himself, he would have a big ass workload making all of the graphics himself, and if he accepted submissions, then it would be a compilation of a bunch of styles and it would look like shit.

DF works fine with ascii graphics, and allows him to focus more on the game.

if this has been posted before, too bad. I woke up ten minutes ago and we've got what fifteen pages of reading material and five posters? you guys take this issue very seriously

[Red Jackard]

I'm not certain where the controversy comes from. Like sphr said:

   

quote:ascii supporters have no real reason to be anti-non-ascii

It is listed in the development notes that Toady definitely plans provide support for more extensive tilesets and an improved UI. Nowhere does it mention him making graphics, Telltolin.

Whether the player prefers these tiles to be characters or pictures is mostly irrelevant - the change will happen, and both styles would be made by enthusiasts. Where is the conflict in pleasing both sides?

[ January 23, 2008: Message edited by: Red Jackard ]

[Mike Mayday]

quote:Originally posted by Kayla:
<STRONG>

Edit: In relevance of this post, I just realized Mike may have not been mislead into thinking that 3D equals isometric sprites, but was instead suggesting it as an alternative. If this is true, then I apologize for what will apparently be seen as some aggressiveness. That is all.
</STRONG>

Yeah, that was pretty much my intention, but don't worry, I didn't perceive your post as aggressive. It simply made me ralize that I was being unclear.
RJ: adding tileset support and the possibility to use an "isometric" view are different things.
But the only reason why I'd love to have isometric graphics is the 3d nature of the world (much more convenient). Anyway, I once again agree that
A)graphics are not a priority right now
B)What the hell are we even discussing, this is TO's game, not ours!

[ January 23, 2008: Message edited by: Mike Mayday ]

[John Johnston]

quote:Originally posted by briktal:
<STRONG>There's really one big improvement you get from that: everything can have its own image.  That's really the main limitation of the "ASCII only" system.</STRONG>

Good point.  I guess the fundamental limits are the size in displayed pixels of the tile (regardless of whether it is filled with a standard ASCII symbol or a proper picture) and the number of shades of colour we can easily distinguish.  As things stand a single ASCII symbol can represent many different objects (e.g. you can distinguish a carpenter from a mechanic) but there are limits (e.g. you can't distinguish a carpenter from a woodcutter).  A tile obviously has more freedom to employ colours but there are still some limitations; a series of tiles, representing walls, say, which had slightly different shading to indicate slightly different rocks wouldn't necessarily be an improvement.  But yeah, I concede, tiles are more versatile.

It suddenly strikes me as slightly ironic that, having spent thousands of years progressing from pictograms to letters, we enjoy employing letters as crude pictograms again...    

[Lacota]

While I dont mind the Graphic tilesets, i use one myself. what does bug me that they use the 'font' file as the one in the same for graphics.

This begins to affect things in dwarven names.

Keep one file with your typeface, keep it clean and seperate from the 'tileset'.

Keeps everyone happy   ASCII lovers get their ASCII, and tileset people can have theirs too.

I generally dislike

Bob (Bed)eg(Shirt)a(door)e(safe). as a dwarf name  

[Red Jackard]

quote:Originally posted by Lacota:
<STRONG>Bob (Bed)eg(Shirt)a(door)e(safe). as a dwarf name   </STRONG>

temporary fix for that problem

[Stij]

I don't mind having ASCII for now (Toady has more important things to work on), but having an isometric tileset eventually would be great. It would make it a lot easier to visualize multiple z-levels.

Should DF stay in ASCII? I don't think so. Maybe I'm too young to remember when games like Nethack and Rogue were popular, but I see no reason other then nogalstia to keep it. I always figured it was sort of a placeholder for actual graphics.

But if people really want to keep their ASCII, so be it. Let there be an option to turn it on/off.

Also:

quote:Originally posted by Armok:
<STRONG>Toady should spend no time on the graphics or UI because they are already perfect.</STRONG>

Yeah, no.

Other then the graphics, the clunky UI is probably the biggest stumbling block that's keeping more people from playing DF. I see no reason to keep it like it is, except that all the hardcore players like you would have to re-learn how to use it.

[ January 23, 2008: Message edited by: Stij ]

[Idiom]

ASCII is fine for now. Eventually there will be too much data to store into a single symbol, and it's ludicrous to have it flash between more than 3 symbols at a time.
Personally, I'd like Doom style 2.5D graphics (Wasn't the original Dungeon Keeper like this? We need 1st person possession when we get to 3d graphics, like in Dungeon Keeper), so the objects could remain ASCII sprites if you wanted, or something detailed and animated. It would be a lot easier to work on multiple Z levels like this as well. Or hell, just a Quake I quality 3d engine with 2.5D support would be great.

quote: love ASCII graphics because it leaves so much to the imagination

I have to agree with this though.