Print

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

[DrTank09]

Hey, I'm a returning player that has been out of the game for a few years now, I think my last time was playing 44.5?

I know the game will always be a bit intensive for computations but has it be optimized at all since I've been gone?  I heard about the architecture upgrade but I'm not really sure what all that will do for gameplay and how much that will effect the maximum number of tiles my computer can support.

I just got a new, high-end rig to play with and so want to test the capabilities but before I do that I'm wondering if there are any optimization tools for performance reasons beyond the settings suggested in the wiki.

Warm Regards,
Rolan Lodestone

[Salmeuk]

stop worldgen early, so as to generate fewer actors, and therefore result in less lag
generate small or smaller worlds, for the same reason as above
Turn off temperature, lower the number of invaders and / or popcap

So, the same story as it's been for about a decade now. In addition, DFhack has a number of utilities that can help lower itemcount in existing fortresses, so as to improve lag. Check it out.

[DrTank09]

So I take that as no changes.  Thank you!

[Starver]

I think (without looking it up) you were already past the generalising of non-notable historical figures when you laid it aside, which probably was the biggest single thing in worldgenning (can't think of a similar game-time abstraction).

I play on an old machine (out of habit... the hardware still works, and nobody else'd want it now) and though I tend to cut down from the 1050-year history I still go for max-sized worlds (and actually customised for increased intra-cavern layer numbers, though that itself only matters during play/saving) without turning anything off, and activating seasonal saves (always the biggest 'lagger' during play, but might even get me to stand up and get an unhealthy snack rather than unhealthily stay seated for too long).

FPSs* just aren't an issue, IMO, rather than an FPS** where you're trying to dodge grenades while rocket-jumping and either crame-drop or intermittent pauses would be painful even against similarly throttled single-player AIs. YMV, but I spend so much time paused in micromanaging, tweaking and checking things that going to single-digit FPS really is not a problem for me, I probably don't notice most of the time.

If you've got a new 'high end' rig then, apart from the core thing, I think you're probably laughing. Turn things down after your first reacclimatisation, if you find your experience unsatisfactory. (You'll first have a Worldgen or two to make, and that'll be your first opportunity to see if it dawdles at all, and if impatient you can always halt it a century or three earlier, right?)


But I can only speak for how I'd handle it, obviously. As for you, I only can hope you have fun. And, if possible, ‼FUN‼

edit: When I wrote it it I swear it wasn't confusing, but *=Frames Per Second(s) and **=First Person Shooter... for future readers' inflrmation, if they need it. 

[PatrikLundell]

The FPS will drop, all you can do is to reduce the effects. Where the tolerance for a slowed down FPS is depends on the individual. Some are fine with single digits, while some get frustrated at 50%.

The map rewrite is still as far away as in 0.44.5. It's part of the Big Wait leading up to the Myth & Magic arc that, according to the current schedule, will start once the Premium release is made, fallout from Premium vendor backlash is dealt with, the Villains arc finished (it was cut halfway through), and Army/Siege Improvements have been made. The Villains arc ballooned from a few months into a couple of years, and the Premium course change came out of the blue.

[Bumber]

There haven't been any general optimizations, but some FPS-killing bugs that were introduced got fixed (such as one involving vegetation growth.)

[Thisfox]

Honestly, I think the FPS progression is better than it was. I tend to play "small" (pop cap 60-100 depending on plans) forts though. Not locking a door to your fort cat is a must, however. Nothing ruins FPS like a cat who can't get to where she's goin'.

[Nopenope]

Pretty much nothing has changed and your fortress is doomed to FPS death sooner or later especially if you have the gall to enjoy such frivolous features as temperature, a default sized embark map or having more than 30 dwarves. The 64-bit thing just means worldgen won't crash if it takes up than 4GB or something but there hasn't been a noticeable speed increase otherwise. This is one of the major factors that are likely to threaten the game and its long-term development.

[Shonai_Dweller]

Pretty much nothing has changed and your fortress is doomed to FPS death sooner or later especially if you have the gall to enjoy such frivolous features as temperature, a default sized embark map or having more than 30 dwarves. The 64-bit thing just means worldgen won't crash if it takes up than 4GB or something but there hasn't been a noticeable speed increase otherwise. This is one of the major factors that are likely to threaten the game and its long-term development.

However unlike the many reports of "so many features are making the game slower and slower" they're not. So that's something. It's managed the past 7 years at the current framerate  (is actually faster than back then due to minor optimizations) despite the many new features, which is longer than most games are ever supported for. And people are still playing it regardless, so not sure what your prediction is based on.

[Salmeuk]

are likely to threaten the game and its long-term development.

Right, uh, I recall reading something like that - when Bush Jr. was in office.

Flaws are flaws, but if the underlying experience is unique, there will always be interest.

[Molly]

I have found that DFHack helps a lot. Periodically deleting junk items and stuff can often boost the fps back up to acceptable levels.

[Nopenope]

However unlike the many reports of "so many features are making the game slower and slower" they're not. So that's something. It's managed the past 7 years at the current framerate  (is actually faster than back then due to minor optimizations) despite the many new features, which is longer than most games are ever supported for.

I didn't say the game was getting slower, I said nothing had changed. It's still a struggle to get a fortress going with the default range of features (temperature on, 4x4 embark, normal visitors and migration waves) on past 10 years for most computers without absolutely murdering your FPS.

And people are still playing it regardless, so not sure what your prediction is based on.

Toady himself has admitted that forum activity has been slowing down for the last 10 years or so, and his move to mainstream platforms is part of his plans to ensure his long term financial stability because the current level of community engagement just won't do. The wiki is often completely out of date. Ask bay12 regulars (especially in the lower forums) and you'll often get admission of not playing the game for the last few years.

My pet theory that reconciles this visible lack of engagement with Toady's comfortable patreon numbers is that many people like the idea of the game, they like Toady's vision, and want to support him - but when it comes to actually playing the game, they just don't get around to it. In that sense DF is becoming more and more like an artwork and less and less like a game, something to be admired from apart rather than played. (The fact that development mostly focuses on worldgen stuff instead of fortress mode stuff reflects this trend as well.) And in any case I don't think it will do the game any good if the first impression of new players on Steam is that they can't play the game with the default settings without it slowing down to a crawl.

[Shonai_Dweller]

One solution would be to add a debug menu that gives you in-built access to some of the fps saving commands Dfhack currently offers. The game is in alpha after all, and as far as I can tell no-one is going to be blatantly lying to the public about that status. Then fix up the more common instant FPS killer bugs which many mistake for FPS death (pets pathing through locked doors, moody dwarves stuck on stepladders, etc) and I think you have a half-decent release.

You won't get a multi-year rewrite of the game prior to Steam release though. Dwarf Fortress will continue to be the glorious mess many people still love to play (or just pay for without playing, whatever, that business model still seems to support continued development).

[Salmeuk]

However unlike the many reports of "so many features are making the game slower and slower" they're not. So that's something. It's managed the past 7 years at the current framerate  (is actually faster than back then due to minor optimizations) despite the many new features, which is longer than most games are ever supported for.

I didn't say the game was getting slower, I said nothing had changed. It's still a struggle to get a fortress going with the default range of features (temperature on, 4x4 embark, normal visitors and migration waves) on past 10 years for most computers without absolutely murdering your FPS.

And people are still playing it regardless, so not sure what your prediction is based on.

Toady himself has admitted that forum activity has been slowing down for the last 10 years or so, and his move to mainstream platforms is part of his plans to ensure his long term financial stability because the current level of community engagement just won't do. The wiki is often completely out of date. Ask bay12 regulars (especially in the lower forums) and you'll often get admission of not playing the game for the last few years.

My pet theory that reconciles this visible lack of engagement with Toady's comfortable patreon numbers is that many people like the idea of the game, they like Toady's vision, and want to support him - but when it comes to actually playing the game, they just don't get around to it. In that sense DF is becoming more and more like an artwork and less and less like a game, something to be admired from apart rather than played. (The fact that development mostly focuses on worldgen stuff instead of fortress mode stuff reflects this trend as well.) And in any case I don't think it will do the game any good if the first impression of new players on Steam is that they can't play the game with the default settings without it slowing down to a crawl.

You know, I used to agree with a lot of what you are saying here, things like the forums slowing down and (personally) discussing the game more often than actually playing it. But really, I'm pretty sure the era of text forums has passed, and new generations are not really attracted to this word-heavy format of community, preferring instead the likes of Reddit memery and perhaps youtube / streamer content. So I don't think the DF forums are an exception, in that many old-school forums are dying places. .

I play DF more and more these days, because I have learned to approach it from new perspectives. I think a lot of players find the game stale, for sure, but to somehow imply that a game is broken because it's player base played it so damn much they got sick of it is honestly a statement in the game's favor. How many games keep you coming back, years later, with the promise of that sheer imaginative joy you experienced upon first learning to play?

It's true that some imaginative fortress concepts are, by all measures, impossible due to issues with too many units, or too much generated lag, there is still quite a bit of Game to be found.

The wiki is often completely out of date.

This is changing as we speak. Multiple threads and interested people are present on this very forum!

In that sense DF is becoming more and more like an artwork and less and less like a game, something to be admired from apart rather than played.

Can't it be both? Or different things for different people? DF's existence as a game was kind of an accidental, or coincidental, occurrence, and the style of development has always spoken to the notion that Fortress Mode is simply one element of a much larger creation. While I understand your theories arise from concern for the completion or success of the project, you should also consider that DF has never really been 'successful'.

This will all be tested in the next year with the Steam release and continued development, for sure.

[Nopenope]

I think a lot of players find the game stale, for sure, but to somehow imply that a game is broken because it's player base played it so damn much they got sick of it is honestly a statement in the game's favor. How many games keep you coming back, years later, with the promise of that sheer imaginative joy you experienced upon first learning to play?

Sure, I am not disparaging the game itself (otherwise I wouldn't have kept playing it for the better part of 12 years). The fact of the matter remains that, if you want to stretch development over literal decades, and intent on keeping your community alive this whole time to support you, you've got to renew yourself. However, the game has been playing more or less the same for 10 years. Yes, stuff like multi-tile trees, world activation, raids, visitors were important - but in terms of actual gameplay, not that much. Most of the new stuff you can ignore, and sometimes you should do without it because it will drain your FPS. So all in all I would say the game so far has not been very successful at renewing itself so as to keep its playerbase interested. This is all normal for a normal game with a normal obsolescence date where you just move on - for Toady's long-term plans it's kind of worrying.

This is changing as we speak. Multiple threads and interested people are present on this very forum!

Only because a few people and I repeatedly whined about it, but I agree the situation has been improving somewhat.

Can't it be both? Or different things for different people? DF's existence as a game was kind of an accidental, or coincidental, occurrence, and the style of development has always spoken to the notion that Fortress Mode is simply one element of a much larger creation. While I understand your theories arise from concern for the completion or success of the project, you should also consider that DF has never really been 'successful'.

This will all be tested in the next year with the Steam release and continued development, for sure.

Yes, to be sure, the Steam release will be a true test for the direction of the game. I think people's attitudes change quite a bit when they pay for a product (as opposed to donating to a project you want to support), and I do think new players will be less forgiving of the game's quirks than us bay12ers (especially since many bay12ers are not affected by the bugs in a game they do not play). However, Toady is not stupid and very quick to react to feedback when pressed, so it may turn out that development become more gameplay oriented (with more FPS improvements, features that actually affect fortress mode, etc.) and less worldgen-only-abstraction oriented. It'll be interesting to see for sure.