Thanks for the quote, Shonai_Dweller. I don't follow other discussion fora, so I don't see what's posted in those.
If the tile set limitations are going to be addressed as well, the rewrite is larger than I thought, as well as having a larger impact, as I assume that means increasing the number of bits used for assets (in which case there might not be any need for a world map tile set, as that could just be a subset of a larger one, which is one of the points mifki listed as a wished for feature in the TwbT thread). The support for a larger tile set would definitely be welcome as such, but I think the timing could be better (i.e. not as a derail of a detour of a departure from the Myth & Magic development, and getting it done within a somewhat reasonable time frame from The Announcement to an actual Steam/Itch release might be challenging as well). There's never a really good time, though.
"Open source" is vastly different from making the code available to hand picked people (with suitable conditions both on the readability/level of commenting/coding style of the outsourced code [so Toady can maintain it should he wish to/need to], and requirements that the DF source code is handled in a suitable manner). I agree it's a wise move to use a trusted intermediary to handle the administration for the tile set work, though, and hope both Kitfox and the artists can provide some useful feedback as well.
I agree some people will label DF as abandonware no matter what (if I understand it correctly there's some banned bugger who's already on a crusade of revenge on Steam), but the crucial thing is neither a small number of malcontents, nor a confident community (who's currently over here), but what happens with those in between. If the general perception is negative DF will likely suffer from fewer who's willing to try it out despite poor ratings (which is what a generally negative perception would result in). I also disagree it's a matter of spin doctoring: there's an important element of meeting expectations, as well as setting the expectations appropriately (the latter can be helped a bit with proper marketing, but not the former). I'd expect the average Steam customer to be far less tolerant when it comes to both slow development and late and feeble bug fixing (i.e. a constantly growing mountain of outstanding bugs) than the current community, with little to no understanding or care for the current development method. We're joining Toady's ride, but Steam customers are temporary licencees (due to Steam's horrible EULA), and likely expect to be treated as customers.
Thanks to Knight Otu as well, posting another off site quote while I wrote this post (and it's good to hear Toady is going to try to adjust the process to better meet expectations). I don't think long development waits is as much of an issue as a lack of bug fixing, although I think there's a need to fix some intermediate bugs in parallel during the development waits as well as the fatal ones to provide a sense of progress and developer presence to those who don't follow the game development as such, just play the game.
Author
Topic: Future of the Fortress (Read 3137918 times)