Print

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

[Idles]

Here's an example for how graphical tiles could work, from a project of mine.
The game would show all the z-levels visible, but obscure the z-levels to different degrees depending on their depth from the current level.  Also, units and items would only be visible on the current level, and only the terrain would be shown on other levels to reduce the complexity of the renderer.



My renderer uses OpenGL and achieves the "obscured" look by simply adjusting the color values of the texture-mapped quads that it's drawing for lower levels.  If Toady wanted to experiment with more complex OpenGL functions, he could come up with a pixel shader that could do even more interesting effects, like depth of field blurs.

[Sergius]

I'd rather keep it 2D and tile based. With some work it can be made to look isometric/ish:

[Reasonableman]

I'd rather keep it 2D and tile based. With some work it can be made to look isometric/ish:

Obviously, that isn't a DF tileset. BUT IT NEEDS TO BE.

[Omega2]

Sure, as soon as they decide on which point of view they're using!

*goes cross-eyed*

[Fieari]

For mouse support, it'd also be nice to have middle click drag scrolling, on top of the other things.  A right click context menu would be handy.  If everything could be done with the mouse without touching the keyboard, I'd be happy.  That's not to say I want keyboard support gone-- far from it!  I want it possible to use either exclusive mouse, exclusive keyboard, or a combination of both.  Redundancy in control is a good design principle.

[Reasonableman]

For mouse support, it'd also be nice to have middle click drag scrolling, on top of the other things.  A right click context menu would be handy.  If everything could be done with the mouse without touching the keyboard, I'd be happy.  That's not to say I want keyboard support gone-- far from it!  I want it possible to use either exclusive mouse, exclusive keyboard, or a combination of both.  Redundancy in control is a good design principle.

As is flexibility. The option to map each and every command to any button or combination of buttons would be so ridiculously wonderful.

[Dasqoot]

Trying to be very specific:

One thing I'd like to see from a presentation point of view is the ability to change the default ground tile to another ascii character, and eventually, a sprite. There are options in the init file that let you change how the ground looks from far above, and the option to change how chasms look from far above, but there is no way to change grass/dirt/pebble/boulder tiles into something that isn't a little dot on a black square.

When trying to channel and dig out a smooth rock face, its almost impossible to at a glance see what is on your level and what is a level below you. Now, the init has the option to change all ground tiles to periods, but the uneditable ascii symbol for ground one level below you is already periods, which just makes the problem worse.

If the symbol for ground one level below you and ground on your z-level had the same options in the init file as does ground 2 levels below you, it would be a huge step in the right direction. This game doesn't look bad in the least with a decent graphics set. I use curses btw, it's the only one that was possible for me to install without screwing something up. Some of the sets are obviously based on zelda, final fantasy and dragon-warrior, and these I find look very appealing without changing any code or anything major about the game. They are also chosen by the person playing for whatever about the tile-set has an aesthetic that appeals to them. This is a pretty powerful option already, and has barely been touched because there are just a couple tiles that we can't change to make a unified theme.

Alpha channels are going to be awesome when they are used!

On the TLDR side of things, and concerning the presentation arc, me and valcon had a contest to see who could photoshop the best interface. Mine had about 50 animated buttons that slid out into seperate trays that you could place where-ever you want, like maya or photoshop. His was just a right-click context menu. I felt kinda dumb, because that is just a great idea in terms of usability.

As for what toady said, how right clicking while things are unpaused would be frustrating, I don't really see a problem with that, we already have to pause to catch a dwarf with the little (v)iew icon. The only times I feel that needing to pause can be annoying are during designations. I'll spend hours designating, wake up a little and wonder why nothing else got done.

btw Idles' darkening/blurring idea is awesome, and would make mountains look spectacular, imo.

[Andrew]

Here's an example for how graphical tiles could work, from a project of mine.
...



...

This would be wonderful, and an evolution of what's already in place.

[Tormy]

I'd rather keep it 2D and tile based. With some work it can be made to look isometric/ish:

Hm looks like an old Ultima RPG.

[revlob]

Seeing how this thread seems to have become the "What the Presentation Arc Would Mean For Me" thread, I thought I'd chip in. I'm sure these points have probably all been covered before, but I don't post a lot so forgive me if I sound like I'm repeating others.

• Tileset Support - Each item should support its own tile. Alpha blending would allow neat transparency effects, such as the smoke/mist/miasma effects, as well as the ability to show greater detail on the z-level below. We could also put an item on the ground, and see the ground and the item in the same tile. While that doesn't address the question of how to display multiple items in the same square, I'm happy with the current solution of rotating which item is displayed over time.
  Personally I'm not interested in seeing DF from an isometric view, or any other view that requires significant development work to allow it.
• Menu Consistency - Once I've opened a menu I rarely need to move the cursor around, so do menus even really need to use separate navigation keys from the main display? Even when I'm [d]esignating, I don't really need the designate menu open while I paint tiles. I'm someone who values screen real-estate. If it was up to me, I'd have the menu close after selecting an option, or shrunk to show only the currently selected choice. The menu can be re-opened by hitting 'd' again, or you can skip the menu entirely if you know the keyboard shortcut for the mode you're after. Hitting escape would take you out of designate mode.
  If we're keeping menus open, a nice effect that could help would be to highlight the border of the currently focused display tab, so that a user is always sure which tab their navigation keypresses will affect.
• Mouse Control - I liked someone's idea of using the mousewheel to scroll through z-levels. I'm not sure how useful a right-click context menu would be, but the ability to bind actions to mouse clicks (or mouse+keyboard combos) would be great. For me the biggest advantage would be using the mouse to navigate, something like the right-click drag in the map editor would be very handy.
• Sound and Music - I think Toady has already covered what I'd really like to see. Options for contextual music, and sounds effects. A tiny fanfare when someone creates a masterpiece, a musical sting when an ambush is spotted, little dink-dink noises when looking at a workshop, etc. would all add to a more immersive experience.

[Quift]

since everyone has something to say about this.

1, I would prefer a more isometric view. Preferably rotatable. This because you can easily display loads more information in an isometric view.

1.1 I imagine that the underlaying layers that you could "see" are visible in game, so when I'm at the same layer as the top of my main guard tower I see the surronding lands. Very much like the pic above.

1.2 I also imagine that underlaying layers whch you cannot "see" are not plainly visible but that there is some degree of transparancy between layers. Also, tiles which have a clear tile above them should be lighter. And there should be a difference in lightning between inside and outside.

1.3 obviously there needs to be a specific bmp per item. To contain as much information as possible they need to be larger than those we currently have and need to allow differences between: gender, proffession, equipment/non-equipment, wounds, mood, origin, material, quantity, quality and a few others. This quickly becomes vital for a more full and more immersive game experience:

Hey, why is that higher-skill-tier, male, ecsatic, miner not carrying a pick?
That poor unassigned ,female war dog only has three legs!
Why are all these elven arrows lying in single piles everywhere, I should stack these.
All these barrels are emty! Fuck, So where in hell is all that booze?
etc.

Interface is not only how you talk to the game but also how the game talks to you. Bringing me to point 2

2; I would love if the game let me know what is happening more. DF is very deep, complex game with lots of stuff going on that I never get to know about. much because reading up on the dwarves thoughts and emotions is only done while the rest of the game is paused. So a there needs to be a separate window different from the current announcement that needs to me separated into 2.

2.1 This is what is going on with the fort that is "important", sieges, caravans, production orders, this and that cancelled etc. very much like it is now (only with the possibility to zoom to the whereabouts of a specific announcment.

2.2 This separate window (not as a real separate windows, those are the reguge of the lazy, uninnovative and the inept). Here the dwarves are displayed, actions in the world are displayed etc. much of what goes on under the hood gets is day.

Onul, Baron, is no longer Ecsatic. He wonders how the works on his room are going.
Onul, Woodcutter, and Melmbim, Miner, are now friends. May this true dwarven friendship last forever. It was [child]'s party that brought them together.
Onul and Melbim are quarreling over a woman! their friendship have ended!
Urist and Melbim have become lovers, Urist's deity, Waternose the reindeer maquace frowns upon unmarried Lovers.
Onul has become Miserable. He is sulking and it may get worst.
Urist and Melbim have Married. We wish this couple bla bla bla.
The Goblins are the Humans have now decided to live in peace. The filthy traitors have joined forces towards their common enemy, our friends the Elves.

etc. As the tale of Onul, Melbim and Urist shows us there is quite a lot that is going on (and might go on) that would be nice to know.

And finally on the menues. Sorry to say this, but they are a mess. You should never have to click more than three times to make anything done. A good place to start would be to make a bunch of post-its with every possible action, menu etc and then start to place these in what seems to be the most logical way to create a chart.

And finally. I envisage DF to look just like most RTS, or knights and merchants etc. one large view, below it you get the anouncments and the minimap as well as the main menus. at the top you have most critical status (booze, food, number of dwarves, are there any sieges/monsters), and to either the left or/and right side you have the sub menues. More information could be found in an external ledger which should be able to run simultaniously. Just like EU2, CKDV, HOI etc.

This allows lots and lots of information to be displayed.

Cheers and thanks for a great game

[Jay]

You don't have isometrics or depth when you're viewing everything from directly above.
A wall below a wall will not appear, because you can only see the tops.
DF is top-down.  Many of the tilesets don't reproduce it correctly, but yes.  It's a 90 degree angle to the ground.

[Newton]

You don't have isometrics or depth when you're viewing everything from directly above.
A wall below a wall will not appear, because you can only see the tops.
DF is top-down.  Many of the tilesets don't reproduce it correctly, but yes.  It's a 90 degree angle to the ground.

DF is 2d (well in display anyways), how you display that is totally up to the designer.  You rarely ever see a total top down view as you describe, and usually only older games take that perspective (the original Sim City for example).  Isometric is still used in a 2d world, but it gives it more of a 3d look.  Displaying it as such isn't wrong as you seem to assume, because top down games these days are almost always done from a isometric viewpoint.

[Jude]

You don't have isometrics or depth when you're viewing everything from directly above.
A wall below a wall will not appear, because you can only see the tops.
DF is top-down.  Many of the tilesets don't reproduce it correctly, but yes.  It's a 90 degree angle to the ground.

DF is 2d (well in display anyways), how you display that is totally up to the designer.  You rarely ever see a total top down view as you describe, and usually only older games take that perspective (the original Sim City for example).  Isometric is still used in a 2d world, but it gives it more of a 3d look.  Displaying it as such isn't wrong as you seem to assume, because top down games these days are almost always done from a isometric viewpoint.

Well yeah...but they also don't show multiple layers of depth at a time, usually.

[Jay]

You don't have isometrics or depth when you're viewing everything from directly above.
A wall below a wall will not appear, because you can only see the tops.
DF is top-down.  Many of the tilesets don't reproduce it correctly, but yes.  It's a 90 degree angle to the ground.

DF is 2d (well in display anyways), how you display that is totally up to the designer.  You rarely ever see a total top down view as you describe, and usually only older games take that perspective (the original Sim City for example).  Isometric is still used in a 2d world, but it gives it more of a 3d look.  Displaying it as such isn't wrong as you seem to assume, because top down games these days are almost always done from a isometric viewpoint.

It's top-down though.  Look at the walls.  They wouldn't appear as two parallel straight up/down/left/right lines if it wasn't top-down.  They'd be skewed to some direction.