Print

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

[Aquillion]

I prefer ASCII, too.  But if it comes down to the choice between keeping a 'pure' ASCII display, and one that conveys more useful information, I am definitely on the side of going for more information.

I can see this being a major issue with the lighting arc in particular, although the Z-levels right now are sort of bumping up against the limitations of ASCII already.  Of course, I would like it if ASCII is kept as an option, but it could be a sort of pseudo-ASCII -- using smaller ASCII symbols for things further away, adding gradient light effects, maybe even expanding the ASCII set of characters.

There's no reason why ASCII should be a straightjacket, in other words.  Toady can keep the overall appearance that the game has now, while still expanding its display capabilities beyond what you could do in a normal console window.

[Roara Wolf]

May I make a suggestion?

Rather than argue for the importance of including graphics, we use this topic to discuss suggestions.

So far, the only suggestions that I've seen are (edit: which is to say I could have missed a few):

• Seperation of the font file and the tileset, so that dwarves do not have levers and other game objects in their names (among other benefits), with each object being capable of having its own unique entry.
• Grouping classes of objects (primarily monsters, I believe) to a single letter (for example 'f' for "feline")

In response to these ideas... the first I believe is the eventual goal of the graphics system. Honestly, though, I fail to see why having "objects" in text is a major problem, since context is a clear indicator of when it's text and when it's an object on the screen. However, I can see other problems with just text-based graphics, even though I don't personally suffer them; but that's because I've always found roguelikes appealing.

The second idea... all I can say is this is an awesome idea; if we further use colors to distinguish between individual species, we should have plenty. We'd need to reserve five characters to the sapient species (who have different colors for different jobs), but subtracting those, ASCII with the current level of color customization (which I believe can and should be improved, eventually), we can support 32128 different objects by using the full except of the 256 characters, and 128 colors. And that doesn't even include using chameleon effects - plus wasn't there a way to set the background color to bright (which would double that number)? Mind you, that'd include ALL objects, not just creatures - so we'd have significantly less for just creatures. Still, it's most likely enough, and we might be able to squeeze more if all megabeasts and similar creatures of h4x do that glowy thing where they go between dark and bright.

What were you saying about us surpassing ASCII's limitations again?
And we're not even talking about context, here~

Oh, and in the spirit of suggestions... my suggestion is that full RGB support be added to ASCII mode. I'm very willing to wait a few years though, if it's for the sake of awesome features like making monsters with superstrong right arms of death, and taking the war to the goblins, and stuff. :O

[Footkerchief]

The second idea... all I can say is this is an awesome idea; if we further use colors to distinguish between individual species, we should have plenty. We'd need to reserve five characters to the sapient species (who have different colors for different jobs), but subtracting those, ASCII with the current level of color customization (which I believe can and should be improved, eventually), we can support 32128 different objects by using the full except of the 256 characters, and 128 colors. And that doesn't even include using chameleon effects - plus wasn't there a way to set the background color to bright (which would double that number)? Mind you, that'd include ALL objects, not just creatures - so we'd have significantly less for just creatures. Still, it's most likely enough, and we might be able to squeeze more if all megabeasts and similar creatures of h4x do that glowy thing where they go between dark and bright.

What were you saying about us surpassing ASCII's limitations again?
And we're not even talking about context, here~

Nobody is disputing the fact that ASCII + RGB is capable of encoding a great deal of information in a single tile.  Who cares?  We aren't encoding a digital transmission, we're shining bits of light at meatware.  A computer has no difficulty distinguishing between a charcoal gray 'C' for a baleen whale (C for cetacean, as per your highly intuitive system) and an ash gray 'c' for a lobster (crustacean), but I might, because I'm stupid like that.

[Roara Wolf]

The second idea... all I can say is this is an awesome idea; if we further use colors to distinguish between individual species, we should have plenty. We'd need to reserve five characters to the sapient species (who have different colors for different jobs), but subtracting those, ASCII with the current level of color customization (which I believe can and should be improved, eventually), we can support 32128 different objects by using the full except of the 256 characters, and 128 colors. And that doesn't even include using chameleon effects - plus wasn't there a way to set the background color to bright (which would double that number)? Mind you, that'd include ALL objects, not just creatures - so we'd have significantly less for just creatures. Still, it's most likely enough, and we might be able to squeeze more if all megabeasts and similar creatures of h4x do that glowy thing where they go between dark and bright.

What were you saying about us surpassing ASCII's limitations again?
And we're not even talking about context, here~

Nobody is disputing the fact that ASCII + RGB is capable of encoding a great deal of information in a single tile.  Who cares?  We aren't encoding a digital transmission, we're shining bits of light at meatware.  A computer has no difficulty distinguishing between a charcoal gray 'C' for a baleen whale (C for cetacean, as per your highly intuitive system) and an ash gray 'c' for a lobster (crustacean), but I might, because I'm stupid like that.

Oh. I'm sorry. Did I say this was a solution to your hypothetical inability to play roguelikes? It wasn't. Please stop assuming every idea in this topic has to solve that problem, and please stop assuming that that's the only problem in the current display system.
That was a general suggestion. Unlike you, there are many who can play roguelikes, who don't mind text, and yet would still benefit from an improved structure for what each character means as far as creatures go.
People are simply saying that ASCII has limitations and they're already being stomped on. As I have yet to have problems playing with nothing but ASCII, I have yet to see any such limitations being reached. You'd be surprised how easy it is for some people to memorize what each potential color and character combination can mean - particularly if they play the game enough. The suggestion won't assist people who can't do that, but it will assist those that can by limiting what a particular color/character combination can mean.

As has been said, graphics will be eventually added to make it easier on those who can't play with just text. Perhaps one day they'll effectively replace text-mode DF in terms of usage. It might end up being like Nethack, although I think (but could be wrong) that Nethack had it worse, not even having color; just characters.

Another suggestion, since I feel bad about posting in this topic without suggesting things: When graphics are fully introduced, perhaps some way to incorporate graphics into text to make custom alphabets as well, to improve the freedom of the language system, particularly for when that part of the game is looked upon for awesomeification as well.

(edit: Sorry if I came off as mean. I think I have the forum version of road rage, or something. :< )

[Footkerchief]

I wouldn't say "mean," I'd say "confusing my preferences with my capabilities and using them as grounds for bizarre personal attacks."

The ease-of-use limitations of ASCII are subjective.  When people say the limitations are being reached, that statement is in reference to their lack of willingness to construe memorizing random crap as having fun, not yours.  It's not a judgment on your abilities or tastes, okay?

If your response had just been "For me, those limitations haven't been reached," that would have been fine, but you brought up the theoretical number of ASCII-RGB combinations instead, which misses the point.  That's all I took issue with.

[kaypy]

Rather than argue for the importance of including graphics, we use this topic to discuss suggestions.

So far, the only suggestions that I've seen are (edit: which is to say I could have missed a few):

• Seperation of the font file and the tileset, so that dwarves do not have levers and other game objects in their names (among other benefits), with each object being capable of having its own unique entry.

Actually, even that may be above 'the bare minimum'. Theres a whole bunch of symbols and accented characters we could make use of (assuming we dont mind tweaking the language files to avoid them). The problem is that all of the uses of these are hard coded, and hence there's nothing you can do to make use of them, short of going in with a debugger and tweaking constants until one causes eg the barrels to change.

If the game just read the graphics constants from some file, that would be a major step forward. But even that is likely way more difficult to code than you expect. On the other other hand, rigging up a 'draw any terrain' routine and using it consistently might actually cause less problems down the track than a zillion (and counting) hardcoded 'draw this terrain's. At the end of the day, though (is this my fourth hand?), its Toady's game and he has to develop it the way he feels happy.

• Grouping classes of objects (primarily monsters, I believe) to a single letter (for example 'f' for "feline")

Why *discuss* changing creatures when you could just start tweaking them to your hearts content? There's an awful lot that can be done to creature representation already, given enough elbow grease. Want tiles? You got em. Want to rejig the ASCII? Hit the raws. Want ASCII in odd colours? That's just a tile that looks like ASCII.

I've been running class-grouped creatures since about march... My grouping list is over on the mods forum somewhere...

[Earthquake Damage]

RE class-grouped creatures

I think his point is more that they should be that way by default.

[zagibu]

It is indisputable that different entities of the world all need separate graphical hooks, whether ASCII-characters, 2d-tiles or 3d-models are used. It's very modding-unfriendly the way it is.

[scribbler]

It is indisputable that different entities of the world all need separate graphical hooks, whether ASCII-characters, 2d-tiles or 3d-models are used. It's very modding-unfriendly the way it is.

I think this is the real crux of the tileset question. The reality is some like graphics, some like ascii and, I think, the majority would rather have more depth than full 3D.
But, the tiles need full configurability. I, for one, mostly played ADoM so the default ASCII is very unintuitive to me.
A configuration file would allow people to set graphics if they like or use the default ASCII or set up a look based on a favorite RL (Final Fantasy captures, Ultima graphics upgrade, etc.) or draw 1980s 3/4 isometric tiles if they want.

[AfterShave]

I can see this being a major issue with the lighting arc in particular

I'll bump this to point out that lightning could in fact be made in ASCII. By having tiles further away from the light source darkening. The game Pyromancer is in ASCII and is incredibly stylish with it's lightning effects for being an ASCII game.
(Google Pyromancer roguelike to find it)

[Footkerchief]

I can see this being a major issue with the lighting arc in particular

I'll bump this to point out that lightning could in fact be made in ASCII. By having tiles further away from the light source darkening. The game Pyromancer is in ASCII and is incredibly stylish with it's lightning effects for being an ASCII game.
(Google Pyromancer roguelike to find it)

Spoiler: this bump is useless without pictures (click to show/hide)

[darkflagrance]

Whether or not the present community desires graphics, I think minimum graphic support soon should be a priority, so that the present community can be expanded by however many people would be able to appreciate the game as long as it possessed that minimum level of graphic support. As a result of this, Toady's source of donations would increase, allowing for more support and therefore more incentive.

Furthermore, it is hard to say when we'll have plowed through enough of the game features to reach the presentation arc where the interface is finally addressed. To leave basic graphics support to that time would be a mistake, given the benefits of addressing it soon. If we allow designers out there to start working on advanced tilesets, by the time we reach the main presentation arc, we could already have very excellent tiles for graphics support.

The only question is how long Toady would estimate this kind of basic support to take. I actually kind of wish someone had asked him a question relating to this in a previous Talk.

[AfterShave]

I didn't provide any pictures because the lightning shifts as if you had a torch. Something a picture cannot show.
And yes, I know that wouldn't be practical to have shifting lightning in that way in a turn based RL like DF.

[jockmo42]

I learned to play with ASCII. I tried a tileset once and I really couldn't function. It was ugly, it was pointless, and it made the game much harder for me to understand. I switched back to standard in minutes. Tilesets are a can of worms to bring up here because a lot of people here learned to play with ASCII. Others couldn't invest the time to learn the ASCII tiles and switched to a tileset early, and so they are more comfortable now. I'm comfortable with ASCII because I'm used to filling in the blanks. It really makes you realize how incredible the human mind is when you can play a game like this and see so much more than symbols.

I guess what I'm saying is, to each his own. I will most likely never want anything to do with more graphical support. Interface changes are more than welcome, but I get a long just fine with what I have, and I know I'm not alone. I recognize that graphics can help to draw in more people to our community here, I just don't want them to get in the way of what I believe to be the more important development.

Graphics are fine and dandy, but at the end of the day, you don't want a beautiful pile of shit. Gameplay is what makes a game, and I'm more than happy with Tarn's current priorities.

[Blargityblarg]

I play ASCII. I don't find that I have any problems with interpreting ASCII. I do find that I have problems interpreting the more common graphics sets.

Hence, I, personally, would prefer that graphics are delayed as long as possible in deference to bugfixes, added features et cetera, as graphics hold no benefit for me. This is a selfish decision, and does not take into account the higher chance (be it slightly or significantly) of Toady's donation-fed lifestyle becoming impossible due to discouraged potential donators.

I sympathise with the graphics users who have to interpret bucket-text, if only because I have to do my best to decipher their screenshots. I do not belive that eliminating bucket-text is a necessary step towards making the game playable.