Print

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

[umiman]

Uh, like I said. The question was why I can't take a bunch of guys out for a nice night of slaughter like I should be able to without having to go through some extremely convoluted way of getting everyone at war with one other involving either starting multiple fortress of multiple races or regenning worlds until I hit jackpot. I'm also asking why civ leaders no longer places bounties on ex-adventurers.

Perfectly legitimate concerns. I'm not the only one concerned about it too, with a simple look around the forums and a search of "which version is the best for adventuring". Just that I'm, by nature, very vocal about the things I love.

[LASD]

LASD: That's the thing! We can't start our own personal wars! We can start personal crusades but not personal wars. No one else wants to fight anyone sentient without severe amounts of work or regenning.

Well, personal crusade is a better word for the thing I was going for. I meant that we can go have wars against sites (and so the civilizations)     ...alone.

Then about the development:

I think there is at least one valid point to justify adding things that people wouldn't want just now (like the stone types) and for making things in his own way. They're done so that making DF would remain interesting for Toady himself. If he can more or less do what pops into his mind, it's much more fun than doing the precise things that the community has voted for or otherwise chosen.

Remember that Toady isn't forced to make this game, he just wants to make it. He could stop the development if he didn't feel like it anymore, but I don't think that is going to happen in the near future.

On a sidenote, it's weird to post thoughts about Toady and the development in the forums. I always feel like I'm talking about someone in the same room so that he is just far enough to still hear me, but not close enough to react so that I would know he's listening.

[Andir]

Anyway, Andir, while I like your support, I'm actually right now campaigning for a return to one version ago with this version's additions... kinda. Actually, all I want is to be able to recruit people in adventurer and have them fight with me against other civs, which they refuse to do right now without way too much additional work. So, technically, I'm your enemy.
...
We're basically shareholders, and he is the CEO. Except his aim isn't profit maximization, just dividends. Unless he's being modest and is actually swimming in a cash vault while enjoying greenback cigars.

I don't agree that we are enemies.  You and I both feel that the game should be able to be played out with the greatest freedom possible.  Some of your freedoms were removed or restricted and my freedoms have yet (maybe never) to be realized.  We are just on different sides of the same plate sitting on the table.

I wholeheartedly agree that we ARE in control of the game indirectly.  Without our support the game wouldn't be where it is today.  I have not supported because I feel that the game doesn't meet my expectations for what it should be.  I have posted several suggestions (all of which were shot down by forum goers) and he will not be seeing any money from me until there is a product that meets those expectations.  If umiman has donated, I feel even worse for him losing an aspect of the game that may have been the tipping point to his donation.

[umiman]

LASD: Let's just pretend he's a biblical God until someone stops us then. Here's what I think though.

I think Toady is bound to this game. He can't quit it anymore now that he left his career to pursue this. I'm pretty sure he's aware that by abandoning this game, he really abandons his livelihood for a long, long time. There's probably only two ways to rip off the binds that currently hold him, as I can see anyway:

1. Create a new miracle of a game that can guarantee the same level of donation income as this one (or more).

2. Secure a new career.

Intriguing isn't it? He is now chained by his hobby for the foreseeable future and it was us who chained him. So unless he's been hiding from us some secret financial source, as a group, the community has total power.

Of course, there's the always tempting final option. I'm sure you know it. It's the dark side option that sets the whole forum on fire at the very slightest mention.

Andir: I wouldn't be mouthing off at every opportunity if I didn't already pay retail for the product, so to speak.

[Davion]

Convincing yourself that just because you've donated you have some sort of leverage with the developers speaks volumes of your personality.

[umiman]

Uh huh. And being blind speaks volumes of yours. I said the community has control of Toady. As individuals, we have no power.

[Tigershark13]

in all honesty, i think its fair enough that we forgoe stupid amounts of combat for a few releases.. i mean would you rather have constants of the same with next to no changes, or drastic changes with a few TEMPORARY bad points, i mean once the armies DO work it'll all be worth it. 

[Davion]

Uh huh. And being blind speaks volumes of yours. I said the community has control of Toady. As individuals, we have no power.

If the community convinces itself that just because it's donated it has some sort of leverage with the developers then that speaks volumes of the personalities within said community.

[umiman]

Tigershark: Dude, chill. I didn't say I was against change. All I want is my adventurer not being a ghost in adventurer. As it stands, unless you're lucky to gen a world where everyone is at war, no one will support you when you fight another civ. Add this with the fact that the  leaders now, for some reason, refuse to give bounties on ex-adventurers and this is really, really irritating.

That's it. Can you think of a viable reason why those are bad things that I really shouldn't dislike? In fact, can you think of a good reason why these features were removed at all?

[Sergius]

I'm sorry, are you reading a different thread? Because I haven't seen anyone actually disagree with your points about what problems there are in the current version, except that when someone points out that it's being fixed you start with "don't give me that shitty answer!" and that Toady should put it the way it was and remove all this "non-hardcoded" nonsense, in essence making a version 39d that's a binary copy of 38c.

Then we jump to comparing Bay12Games to the government becoming a police state and some crazy guy comes in making pointless accusations against "The Community", telling on how he was treated unfairly by "The Community", calling it complacent because it doesn't treat Toady as a peon like they should, and that the game is stepping on his personal freedoms to do anything he can magine.

Then we see claims that somehow people are paying retail for an indy, freeware, alpha version of a game whose author has decided to dedicate full time to, trusting the generosity of strangers... and that somehow "The Community" should leverage that, by holding the author hostage to said generosity, and make him dance like a puppet on strings.

And honestly this thread is just becoming more and more weird and it's starting to look more and more like a bad episode of Bizarro World's version of South Park.

[Anu Necunoscut]

umiman:  I'm sorry if you thought my disclaimer was a copout--mostly it's meant to keep things from getting personal.  Your "god made it that way" rejoinder to anyone who notes the game is in a transitional state is pretty shaky.  I'll explain why in the silliest terms I know:

"God made it that way" is intended as a placeholder for knowledge about why something is, or as a tool squashing inquiry about why something is.  What's the difference between saying "God did it, shut up" and noting that a computer game is in alpha?  Let's compare the two and relish the silliness therein!  :-P

1. Dwarf Fortress has an observable creator we can communicate with.

2. Inquiring about the purpose of any mechanic is -not- discouraged, and gaining knowledge about why a mechanic exists is as simple as asking.

3. If you dislike the way things work, you can say so and the offending mechanic often changes as a result--in just a few months' time!

Note nobody is disagreeing with you in terms of the confusing state of conflict in the current version.  Mostly people disagree that the game now "sucks" just because a major change is only half completed.  Yes, you can make the argument that a previous version feels more "complete."  I'm sure people were saying the same after the addition of the z-axis, no?  But if you expect every iteration of a developing game to feel just as whole and finished as the one before, very few ambitious changes can be made that will satisfy you.  Expecting frequent new versions with big changes to always be complete and whole makes zero sense to me.  Either you have frequent new versions that show some incomplete mechanics, or you have loooong waits between "complete" versions that are buggier for lack of exhaustive testing from the community.

Now I'm off to start the thread "Why do bad things happen to good dwarves?"

[Puzzlemaker]

This thread makes me depressed.

[umiman]

I dunno. All I do is respond to posts inside this thread. Not once have I really changed my stance. The whole, we actually own Toady One thing was a side thought that was brought up because someone mentioned that we don't actually own Toady One.

I'm not sure what you want from me now. I don't think I wanted anything you two even mentioned there. You know that scene, from Batman? Where the Joker holds up the police officer and the other guys ask with guns pointing, "what do you want?!". And the Joker says, "I just want my phone call". It's kinda like that right now.

The thread went like this:

Umiman: Why have these features been removed?
- nice discussion -
Davion: This game is alpha. Stop whining.
SirPenguin: Yeah dude. It's totally alpha! Eventually it'll get better, you'll see.
Umiman: Yeah, I know that. But it doesn't answer why these features have been removed.
- discussion -
slMagnvox: Don't like the game right now? Live with it!

Perhaps you are subconsciously misreading the other posts for being my ideas? Remember, as I've said in every single post, all I want is an explanation for why those features were removed. I have no idea what you guys are going on about incomplete mechanics or "don't give me that shitty answer". This kinda feels like I'm the chap sitting in between two big sized drunks screaming at each other while I ask the bartender for a drink.

So, I'll make things simple for you two, Anu and Sergius. What do you think I was talking about? Send me a PM so we can avoid derailing this thread any further.

[Tigershark13]

i do see your point i'm just willing to wait and mess with the awesome world gen for now... yay for stupidly cold/warm worlds

[umiman]

i do see your point i'm just willing to wait and mess with the awesome world gen for now... yay for stupidly cold/warm worlds

I'm going to hug you. First time anyone has ever admitted that