Print

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

[Tormy]

As for the graphics, isometric could work. Do you guys remember this lovely screenshot?

I've seen it, but that image doesn't (and wasn't intended to) address any of the issues I mentioned (it also has fractional Z levels which don't currently exist and aren't likely to exist in the future, so it's not the best test image, though I understand that wasn't its original purpose so much).

The way I saw it the  z-levels in that image are a 1-1 translation to the current z-levels in DF but just under-sized for overview purposes.
This would spark the suggestion of 'scalable' z-level representation so the user can choose their preference between overview (low/flat z-levels) and realism (high/tall z-levels) representation wise.

It does do one of the things that bugs me in general about isometric, which is obscuring the view with things like trees, which can be handled with transparency I suppose, but the main issue is how to handle the stacked Z levels of a typical fortress.

The way I see it is to do it the same way it is done now. You see everything 'up-to' the 'current'  z-level. The user can navigate up or down cutting down more and more of the terrain/buildings as they go down.

The only problem will be terrain/objects that is obscured by terrain/objects on equal z-level.
This is a minor thing and depends on the type of isometric view that is picked (angle of view).
Like you suggested for objects this can be mediated by transparency and for terrain to let the user pick (between 2 at least) z-level representation heights.


Like suggested before the ideal way to go is to make the terrain/buildings polygon based and the objects/creatures sprites. Allow the user to set the view angle and current z-level and obscure anything above that level (maybe baring creatures/moving objects). But I guess that is out of the question?

Yeah indeed, exactly as isometric should work. I see no problems with it. Toady, it is not necessary to have isometric graphics btw, imho simple 2D top-down is also enough. Well of course isometric looks better, and if it can be solved to have isometric graphics without having any issues with it in DF, go for it!

[axus]

The dude should make his own small-scale DF inspired game with those graphics =)

[Sergius]

In another thread, I was reading about how the way brooks work at the moment (being a full z-level deep, yet allowing creatures to stand on them) is a workaround to placate the current z-level system. If so, what we could eventually see is a z-level system that makes terrain vary between 1-7 high in each z-level, which practically begs for a Stronghold-style rotating isometric view. It'd still be divided into the same number of z-levels, those levels would just be subdivided into 7 separate layers which could be dirt, grass, water, stone, or any number of things.

I had thought about something similar to that, I don't remember if I ever filed the suggestion, but the ability for dwarves to carve "real" ramps: tiles with variable heights (1 to 7) mostly so you could control more the flow of liquids. It would work just like it is now (a 1-deep water on top of a 1-high ramp would be considered 2 units of water for flow purposes). Of course something would have to be done about the "walkability" of those tiles, like forcing dwarves to crouch at certain minimum, and unable to walk on tiles that are 6-7 high.

[Glutton]

About the top/down vs isometric view. Im for dop/down... because it is really easy to mod it to the "pseudoisometric" by the moders. I mean somethink like this:
http://dwarf.lendemaindeveille.com/index.php/Image:SS_moons_square_16x16.PNG
you know what i mean... it is not not isometric in the way that trees are blocking view to other fields. But you are also not looking on the bjects from the top... but you can see the chairs or stairs from the "isometric" view...

For me this is the best solution. No problems with blocked view by the wall, tree or workshop. But still it is muc hmore nicer then looking directly from top.

And it is even easiest solution for the Toady.. just adding tiles for every object in the game. And then letting modders to do some pretty-looking pseudo isometric tileset :-)

[Sergius]

Ok, commenting on the other stuff:

I see NOTHING wrong about pausing before clicking on a rapidly moving "sprite". When I played Baldur's Gate, I always paused the game before trying to click on individual units, otherwise I just dragged a rectangle around everyone or used the "select all" hotkey. Which is not such a bad idea, using a rectangle selection to "catch" those pesky little buggers (not necessarily making it support multiple selection, unless you're planning on adding that anyway).

And isometric view sucks. If we don't have any partial levels, it's not really necessary. In fact, the ability to see one z-level down on 2D would be more useful in my opinion: have anything one z-level below visible but grayed out or something.

[Red Jackard]

About the top/down vs isometric view. Im for dop/down... because it is really easy to mod it to the "pseudoisometric" by the moders. I mean somethink like this:

That's not top-down, though. Tilesets could be made much nicer if they allowed stuff like these:

[penguinofhonor]

It is possible that this idea has been suggested and rejected in the past, but I would really like an interface similar to FreeCiv or perhaps even like Photoshop. What I mean is that you have a main game window that continues doing whatever dwarves do, and you can have multiple smaller windows up for other things like the list of dwarves, stocks or what have you and make adjustments while the game continues to run. So you could leave open whatever menus you wished and rearrange them as you like. This may be insanely difficult or impossible to implement, but I think it would improve my experience more than graphical changes or the ability to use the mouse more.

I hate multiple windows for the same program.

You have to worry about things like moving each and every window whenever you want to move the game around, clicking on each and every window whenever you want to get them out from behind another window, accidentally closing one of them (which causes you to have little to no control over what's going on in the other windows; this would be like closing the window that lets you select which tool you're using in photoshop), and opening a stupid little menu to summon your stupid little windows back because you accidentally exited one.

If these were implemented, I'd probably have to quit playing. I despise them.

[Red Jackard]

If these were implemented, I'd probably have to quit playing. I despise them.

this sounds very unlikely

It is possible that this idea has been suggested and rejected in the past, but I would really like an interface similar to FreeCiv or perhaps even like Photoshop. What I mean is that you have a main game window that continues doing whatever dwarves do, and you can have multiple smaller windows up for other things like the list of dwarves, stocks or what have you and make adjustments while the game continues to run. So you could leave open whatever menus you wished and rearrange them as you like. This may be insanely difficult or impossible to implement, but I think it would improve my experience more than graphical changes or the ability to use the mouse more.

Perhaps something like this?

[mostlikely]

It is possible that this idea has been suggested and rejected in the past, but I would really like an interface similar to FreeCiv or perhaps even like Photoshop. What I mean is that you have a main game window that continues doing whatever dwarves do, and you can have multiple smaller windows up for other things like the list of dwarves, stocks or what have you and make adjustments while the game continues to run. So you could leave open whatever menus you wished and rearrange them as you like. This may be insanely difficult or impossible to implement, but I think it would improve my experience more than graphical changes or the ability to use the mouse more.

I hate multiple windows for the same program.

You have to worry about things like moving each and every window whenever you want to move the game around, clicking on each and every window whenever you want to get them out from behind another window, accidentally closing one of them (which causes you to have little to no control over what's going on in the other windows; this would be like closing the window that lets you select which tool you're using in photoshop), and opening a stupid little menu to summon your stupid little windows back because you accidentally exited one.

If these were implemented, I'd probably have to quit playing. I despise them.

It all depends how smart the system is.

Windows can auto-dock, open in predefined locations, be un-closable all to mediate the pains of user mistakes.
You could for example have the current DF interface (3 windows 2 of which toggle or size) and have a button/key to unlock them so you can move them around and size them as you want.
That way you can 'choose' to have flexibility at your mentioned risks.

I'm always a fan of changing the core of the system so that it works exactly the same from the start but can be unlocked by the user to gain flexibility.

[Jude]

As for the graphics, isometric could work. Do you guys remember this lovely screenshot?

I honestly can't picture how isometric could ever work. On the other hand, I love those dwarf graphics and I'd totally play with them in a full-screen version (if I could ever tear myself away from using Dystopian Rhetoric graphics, which I'm all attached to now)

[korora]

I'm with penguinofhonor on this one.  Personally, I like DF in windowed mode, tucked to the side of my desktop so I can do other stuff while I wait for the little buggers to dig.  I don't want something that takes up much more screen real estate than it already does. I wouldn't mind more modularity, though; a more vertical setup might be nice, for example.

Also, I'm not sure why people always dream fondly of navigating 7 layers of contextual submenus.  It's almost always going to be much faster to use the keyboard after some short initial learning time.  I don't begrudge people the option, but keyboard support should always be standard.

I also agree that isometric is infeasible for underground stuff without obscuring a lot of information.

I guess to sum up, personally I'd much rather see new gameplay features than new interface features. (Then again, ASCII is actually a selling point for me, so my opinion is probably nonstandard.)

[Exponent]

Regarding additional mouse support, I would very much wish for the following:

Mouse wheel to go up/down z levels while the cursor is over the main view.
Mouse wheel to scroll menus when the cursor is over the list of options/items.
Mouse button to select options/items in menus.
Shift + mouse button to select a range of options/items in menus that allow multi-select (trading screen, stocks screen to mass forbid, mass dump, et cetera)
Ctrl + mouse button to select multiple options/items like above, but not as a range.
Ctrl + shift + mouse button to select multiple distinct ranges.

Other than that, I do not have a particularly strong desire for other mouse features at the present time.  The keyboard works well enough for most things, but somewhat more inefficiently (or not at all yet) regarding the items listed above, in my mind.  Context menus for creatures and other things, or the ability to specify locations beyond just the designations (for example, when building stuff) might be nice, but they either strike me as less of a priority, or as more complex to implement.

[Davion]

If you right-click somewhere else on the screen while already in a context menu then it jumps to the new tile.

Does that include within the boundaries of the context menu?  I guess if the menu is translucent it wouldn't be too confusing, and you could get used to the right button popping you around as its primary function.

Yeah, that sounds good. Right-clicking within the boundaries of the menu would still move it to a tile "underneath" the menu.

[Jude]

Regarding additional mouse support, I would very much wish for the following:

Mouse wheel to go up/down z levels while the cursor is over the main view.
Mouse wheel to scroll menus when the cursor is over the list of options/items.
Mouse button to select options/items in menus.
Shift + mouse button to select a range of options/items in menus that allow multi-select (trading screen, stocks screen to mass forbid, mass dump, et cetera)
Ctrl + mouse button to select multiple options/items like above, but not as a range.
Ctrl + shift + mouse button to select multiple distinct ranges.

Other than that, I do not have a particularly strong desire for other mouse features at the present time.  The keyboard works well enough for most things, but somewhat more inefficiently (or not at all yet) regarding the items listed above, in my mind.  Context menus for creatures and other things, or the ability to specify locations beyond just the designations (for example, when building stuff) might be nice, but they either strike me as less of a priority, or as more complex to implement.

For me, why I want mouse support is all this stuff, plus being able to have the option to designate mass buildings with the mouse, and right click on a tile to open up a menu with all the availabe options for it. Obviously a mouse is not necessary for this, but it would be nice.

Also, the thing about a right click giving me all the options isn't necessarily mouse related; I just want the "q" "v" and "k" commands to be combined so I can just select a tile and have all the available commands right there.

[Wuis]

I just started playing, and I must say I really like it has kept me more occupied over a week then most games, Having said that the only reason I really got into it was due to the graphics set and all earlier tries I made into the ascii version failed miserably cause I just couldn't see the matrix. maybe that means I'm a graphics harlot.
anyhow I would just like to pitch in my 2 inexperienced cents.

I would really like to see all objects being made so people can add sprites for them, and then at a much later time consider going to an isometric view point. that doesn't encompass more then 1 z level, but maybe will allow for 7 layers (like water) , per z level.

other then that I found that I picked up the keyboard commands rather quickly and can't really imagine for most people that the mouse will not cause a slow down gameplay wise. the only thing i'd change of the interface is maybe make it more logical with the space and the f9 and that sort of thing. basicly I can't see what a complicated mouse system would add that couldn't be done easier with a keyboard. maybe make all the interface items clickable but thats all I would possibly like to see the mouse being used for, and even that is not really high on my list.

well thats my things i'd like to see