Print

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

[Warlord255]

That while impressive, it could just as well not be there, and the game would control and react exactly the same

Yeah but isn't that one of the points of playing Dwarf Fortress as opposed to a strategy game of some sort? (Hmm I really should get my hands on Dungeon Keeper 2)

Is it really better to strip down Dwarf Fortress to its bare elements?

I think Dwarf Fortress is better for its world-generation; there's a sense of scale and persistence that, while not quite perfected yet, has amazing potential and for me already makes playing a game of Dwarf Fortress much more rewarding than a simple "build a base, win the game" civ or RTS game.

[G-Flex]

We've waited two years and the only major improvements since the move to 3D have been 1) the location finder and 2) multiple construction selection.

Pay more attention to development. We've also gotten a very much revamped worldgen/history system, for instance. Just because you don't see a change right away doesn't mean it isn't there, or that no work got put into it. Watch a world generate sometime and you'll see.

The problem with this is that the player is not invited to take part in this action at all.  If the player were to make the history himself through his actions, that's one thing, sure, and then the history of his actions would be a neat summary a la a succession game write-up.  However, the bulk of changes made to DF3D have been, as stated, worldgen, history and other appearance trackers, which happen completely independently of the player and are not the player's toys.

People have long been rationalizing these and other "improvements" as leading up to some grand vision, or that the later, actual gameplay updates will come easier once we have these modifiers in place, but I just don't see it.

How can you not see it? Eventually, Toady and Threetoe want the adventurer and dwarf fortress to be able to interact meaningfully with civilizations, creatures, and the world. This is hard to do if those meaningful interactions don't even exist. The framework for civilizations interacting, warring, developing, etc. is necessary to all that.

The player could have wars without any underlying religion worldgen process to supposedly motivate it, for example, and the wounds system was already quite thorough enough.  While I admit that giving a beast a skin of iron or whatever will definitely make it more difficult, I don't see how these gameplay concerns couldn't have been handled through some careful tweaks to the existing system.

If the wars have no underlying motivation, they end up being incredibly artificial and stilted. The current wounds/body system also doesn't allow for things like actual material considerations, use for body parts, REAL wound-tracking and scarring, infections, etc. The game adopting a reasonable system for materials, bodies, and so forth opens the door for a ton of new stuff. Just read the dev lists and you'll see it.

I think you're just complaining about things the effects of which you aren't immediately seeing. A lot of people do that.

[Neonivek]

I think you're just complaining about things the effects of which you aren't immediately seeing

We need a name for this... How about Alpha Shock?

[G-Flex]

I think one problem is that people don't seem to see the design philosophy behind the game.

They see no problem with something like pre-scripted wars (e.g. goblins always at war with dwarves) or a lack of civ interaction because it's what they're used to, when in reality, in a game like DF a lot of the fun comes from the surprising conclusions that procedurally-generated content creates.

And as far as the wounds/body systems go, I don't really think I need to say much more about the potential for those, even if only from the perspective of allowing the game to make reasonable sense of what industrial/food materials can come from what creatures and why.

[Mailbox]

I think you're just complaining about things the effects of which you aren't immediately seeing. A lot of people do that.

Or he could be raising valid points to consider about the way Toady is going about the project. Toady's "vision" for the game may be immutable but that doesn't mean that it is perfect. People like Hitler have a legitimate fear of the game becoming too bloated and filled with useless things that would been better off removed or, better yet, never been implemented in the first place.

[change name please]

If the wars have no underlying motivation, they end up being incredibly artificial and stilted. The current wounds/body system also doesn't allow for things like actual material considerations, use for body parts, REAL wound-tracking and scarring, infections, etc. The game adopting a reasonable system for materials, bodies, and so forth opens the door for a ton of new stuff. Just read the dev lists and you'll see it.

I think you're just complaining about things the effects of which you aren't immediately seeing. A lot of people do that.

I'll wait and see for the next version (whenever that may be) to tell you what I think of wound-tracking and scarring and etc etc but I think by and large it will be much like the existing "this dwarf has ruined arm, this dwarf has ruined leg, this dwarf has brain damage" system but again with even more description words.  The poisons may end up with particular antidotes but this is far from a core gameplay feature.

With regard to warfare, though, it would be sufficient to allow the player to determine his own diplomatic status at his leisure without tracking a bunch of other ancillary variables that he doesn't get to actually do anything with.  Religions would be neat with a system of altars or divine favors or etc. etc. but considering the current dev cycle and current dev priorities such a bloat as "the world beyond your fortress matters one iota" or "religions have any effect" are so far off that I hate to bring them up.

[Footkerchief]

We need a name for this... How about Alpha Shock?

I think it's a combination of myopia and (justifiable) frustration.  It's also worth noting that this kind of frustration is unique to DF veterans who have played long enough to become jaded.  You won't find many newbies complaining that farming is too easy, or that there's not enough to do in fortress mode.  This thread was meant to be about more typical first-impression turn-offs, but the title was a bit ambiguous and there were axes to be ground.

With regard to warfare, though, it would be sufficient to allow the player to determine his own diplomatic status at his leisure without tracking a bunch of other ancillary variables that he doesn't get to actually do anything with.  Religions would be neat with a system of altars or divine favors or etc. etc. but considering the current dev cycle and current dev priorities such a bloat as "the world beyond your fortress matters one iota" or "religions have any effect" are so far off that I hate to bring them up.

Current dev priorities like implementing those other features (constant neverending attacks from the underground) that you came into this thread complaining about and are now not mentioning for some reason?  Or did you mean the squad revisions, which will finally lay some actual concrete groundwork for the Army Arc?  Or the improved sieges and farming, which Toady has indicated will probably get worked on for the release after this one?  At this point your complaint really looks like "Toady is spending only half his time working on features that will give me immediate gratification."

Or he could be raising valid points to consider about the way Toady is going about the project. Toady's "vision" for the game may be immutable but that doesn't mean that it is perfect. People like Hitler have a legitimate fear of the game becoming too bloated and filled with useless things that would been better off removed or, better yet, never been implemented in the first place.

I'm not convinced you and "change my name" are actually in agreement.  He sees bloat as an obstacle to the implementation of more important features, but you're calling it a bad thing in and of itself.  What's your vision for a minimalistic DF?  Do you consider character individualization of any kind (personalities, distinguishing features, etc.) to be frippery?

[Mel_Vixen]

The most improvements of the last year, i think work very nice for ADV-mode. I want to see individuals with different abilitys and personalitys for the ADV-part not Mindless Clones. Sure after the next update they are still mindless but they arent clones anymore.

Ok to get back on topic. I would like to see a tutorial for the Adventuremode as well (also make the sleepingphase a bit shorter if possible). Some Story of Threetoe tailored to this might be a very nice framework to tell the players how to use the Adventure-mode stuff like the inventary or how to interact with the World. Maybe the fights could be prescripted somehow so you can tell the player too how the different fighting stiles work.

[Fossaman]

Hardest things about getting into DF?

1: The varied ground tiles outside. The different colors and shapes for the grass were very, very confusing to me. I had a hard time identifying what was what outside. The way rock and stone were handled made sense, though.

2: Designations. I had to refer to the 'first fortress' tutorial in the wiki to figure it out.

3: Booze production, and how it was interchangeable with water. And the fact that I needed a water source. My first good fort died in it's first or second winter of thirst, because I didn't understand booze production well enough.

[G-Flex]

Hardest things about getting into DF?

1: The varied ground tiles outside. The different colors and shapes for the grass were very, very confusing to me. I had a hard time identifying what was what outside. The way rock and stone were handled made sense, though.

Then change it in the init file. The option is easy enough to find. Although I guess then the complaint turns into "the game should tell you about init.txt".

If the wars have no underlying motivation, they end up being incredibly artificial and stilted. The current wounds/body system also doesn't allow for things like actual material considerations, use for body parts, REAL wound-tracking and scarring, infections, etc. The game adopting a reasonable system for materials, bodies, and so forth opens the door for a ton of new stuff. Just read the dev lists and you'll see it.

I think you're just complaining about things the effects of which you aren't immediately seeing. A lot of people do that.

I'll wait and see for the next version (whenever that may be) to tell you what I think of wound-tracking and scarring and etc etc but I think by and large it will be much like the existing "this dwarf has ruined arm, this dwarf has ruined leg, this dwarf has brain damage" system but again with even more description words.  The poisons may end up with particular antidotes but this is far from a core gameplay feature.

If you think that's the case then you haven't been paying attention to the recent development notes, which I suggest you do before acting so presumptuous. Things like medical care and damage in general are getting serious overhauls.

[Sordid]

He's saying that all those frills like worldgen and history really doesn't have a direct impact on gameplay itself.  That while impressive, it could just as well not be there, and the game would control and react exactly the same.

I won't say he doesn't have a point, but he lost a lot of credibility tagging himself "Hitlers Cumrag" anyway.

Oh I will say that he doesn't have a point. It's basically like saying that the Lord of the Rings would read the same way without the Silmarillion. And while that is true to a certain extent, the latter does make the whole experience far more enjoyable if you take the time to delve into it.  And DF isn't exactly what I'd call a casual game.

Reading the World Generation history gets tiresome after the 3rd world and it's laughable to compare several novels to the generated history.

Dwaf Fortress may not be a causal game but it doesn't have to be obtuse in order to be enjoyable.

Oh come on, you're really being deliberately obtuse here. It's called an analogy, I didn't mean to say DF can generate a novel for you to read or anything of the sort. In fact I never even said you're supposed to read the history, just discovering it and piecing it together from engravings and the like adds a whole lot of depth to the game that IMO makes it immensely more enjoyable than if all the depictions were just generic.

[tourettedog]

I'm sort of disappointed to see that the people who really, genuinely don't care what color Urist's left eye is are so off-handedly dismissed as being myopic by some of the posters here, but what the hell.  Here's my two bits.

The lack of interesting things to do for players with a "gamer" orientation rather than a "simulationist" orientation once you get comfortable with the game is a huge turnoff for me right now.  Even using self-imposed limits -- my last fortress was completely open-air design with no walls, no traps, no farming, and no shields or armor -- once you get the hang of the game any given fort ends up being pretty damn dull after 5 or 6 years.  Invaders seem to run out, chasm and lava critters get exterminated, dwarves become stupidly happy over trivial things, and generally it reaches a point where you can quite literally walk away from the keyboard, stop back in to undo the auto-pauses once in a while and order in some more booze production, and the fort will hum on merrily for years with almost zero intervention.

For those that like mega-projects and think that invasions are a distraction from building obsidian pyramids or whatever, that's a good thing.  For people who like an externally-imposed challenge and risk of failure, it's not.

It's good that a lot of these things have either been tweaked already or are on the radar to be fixed, but until they are fixed, the appeal of the game is being limited.  The fact that all the simulationist stuff is hidden away where I don't have to pay attention to it unless I get curious is great, but it also means that there's been very few changes that are visible to someone (like me) who doesn't leaf through every description and history entry as a matter of course, and even fewer that I actually care about.  I mean, do you really care about the state of the teeth and beard of every one of your 100+ digital dwarves?

I'd love to see an "Arcade mode" where it just generates enough random terrain for a single fort, abstracts out the entire world past the fortress map borders, and just keeps throwing more and more crap at you faster and faster until your fort collapses. 

I don't need to know -- and really kind of don't care -- that the goblins are attacking because the demon got attacked by an elf that was enslaved by a dwarf (who had a brown beard that was unevenly cut and was missing his right incisor) that was kidnapped but rescued by those sames goblins 300 years ago.  We got dwarves (all of whom look dwarf-ish), we got goblins (all of whom look goblin-ish), goblins attack dwarves because that's what they do, and we can move on from there to seeing just how long I can hold out against ever-larger waves of successively more pissed off and better armed goblins + friends.

[Mel_Vixen]

It isnt like DF is forcing you to see all the details. If you dont want to see the history of this or this thug just dont look. The goblins stay the same and maybe get mixed with other races and cultures (like dorfs and elves) But they are still attacking - you dont need to ask for the cause , except you dont want to do diplomaty with the steeel short sword.

That the enemys run out is a problem thought but toady works on it. And Religions etc can make the inner workings and problems of a fortress interresting later on.

[Impaler[WrG]]

I feel I've contributed to the 'what hurts the first time player' debate and suggested useful fixes for it and am now going to participate in the ax grinding.

I agree with 'change name please' that development is too oriented towards 'fluff' and not on core game play improving and blindingly obvious fixes/balance of already present features.  Tourettedog puts it quite well in contrasting 'game' and 'simulation' the game aspect has gotten far too little attention as the simulation has gone off on its own tangents.  Having a robust simulation is a good thing ONLY if it supports and vitalizes the game not when it exists for its own sake.

[G-Flex]

I'm sort of disappointed to see that the people who really, genuinely don't care what color Urist's left eye is are so off-handedly dismissed as being myopic by some of the posters here, but what the hell.  Here's my two bits.

You're picking one of the most inconsequential parts of the new body system to criticize. There's a lot more to it than eye color, so you're telling us nothing.

The lack of interesting things to do for players with a "gamer" orientation rather than a "simulationist" orientation once you get comfortable with the game is a huge turnoff for me right now.

Of course it's annoying. Nobody's ever going to deny that. The problem is that, in order for more real gameplay aspects to get developed, the framework BEHIND them needs to be developed, or else Toady winds up just pulling things out his ass, which ends up wasting time because they'd just end up being placeholders for the real thing anyhow.

Even using self-imposed limits -- my last fortress was completely open-air design with no walls, no traps, no farming, and no shields or armor -- once you get the hang of the game any given fort ends up being pretty damn dull after 5 or 6 years.  Invaders seem to run out, chasm and lava critters get exterminated, dwarves become stupidly happy over trivial things, and generally it reaches a point where you can quite literally walk away from the keyboard, stop back in to undo the auto-pauses once in a while and order in some more booze production, and the fort will hum on merrily for years with almost zero intervention.

No arguments there, from anyone as far as I know, and it's not like any of this is planned to STAY this way. The next version is going to see things like chasm/magma pipe critters entering the fortress map through those features, so you can no longer just clear out a chasm and be all set to do with it as you please, for example.

It's good that a lot of these things have either been tweaked already or are on the radar to be fixed, but until they are fixed, the appeal of the game is being limited.

Fair enough, and I agree. The thing is that, like I said, it's not as if Toady can just spend a single weekend plowing through all of those. "Make the game better" isn't on the dev list, and development for a game with the level of intended simulation of this one takes a long, long time, as I'm sure you've noticed.

The fact that all the simulationist stuff is hidden away where I don't have to pay attention to it unless I get curious is great, but it also means that there's been very few changes that are visible to someone (like me) who doesn't leaf through every description and history entry as a matter of course, and even fewer that I actually care about.  I mean, do you really care about the state of the teeth and beard of every one of your 100+ digital dwarves?

Things like scars and missing teeth (aside from maybe some very minor functional effects) add flavor to dwarves. Yes, I personally do care if my battle-hardened general dwarf is full of scars and has a missing tooth and eye, even if the gameplay ramifications of it are rather minor.

I'd love to see an "Arcade mode" where it just generates enough random terrain for a single fort, abstracts out the entire world past the fortress map borders, and just keeps throwing more and more crap at you faster and faster until your fort collapses.

Honestly, then, you're asking for a different game. The objective of DF is to simulate a world. The reason that such an "arcade mode" seems so appealing is because you aren't looking far enough into the future, where, ideally, the game will have you actually DEALING with the foreign civilizations/sites, sending people there, etc.

I don't need to know -- and really kind of don't care -- that the goblins are attacking because the demon got attacked by an elf that was enslaved by a dwarf (who had a brown beard that was unevenly cut and was missing his right incisor) that was kidnapped but rescued by those sames goblins 300 years ago.

But, like I've been trying to say for a few posts now, you WILL need to care once this framework gets developed more and you're actually sending armies out TO those sites, are AFFECTING/starting those wars, dealing with those historical figures, etc. These things aren't even terribly far down the development line; the Army Arc is relatively close at hand.

We got dwarves (all of whom look dwarf-ish), we got goblins (all of whom look goblin-ish), goblins attack dwarves because that's what they do, and we can move on from there to seeing just how long I can hold out against ever-larger waves of successively more pissed off and better armed goblins + friends.

I think I've made a good case already for how the game is moving in a direction far more complicated than that, and why that's a good thing.

Again, the only reason you're clamoring about these features you don't care about is because you don't yet know why you would care about them. Read dev_next or something and look at the kind of stuff you'll be able to do with it once the army arc is done. You'll have your world interaction, wars and civs will actually matter substantially, and more long-term dangers/goals for a fortress will be present.

I agree with 'change name please' that development is too oriented towards 'fluff' and not on core game play improving and blindingly obvious fixes/balance of already present features.

You're committing the exact same fallacy that tourrettedog is. You're assuming the the "fluff" has no gameplay relevance due to short-sightedness. You have to keep in mind the kind of gameplay it's going to make possible in the near future.

In effect, it's as if someone built a pool in the backyard of your house, you're yelling at them for digging a pointless hole instead of building you a swingset or something else fun instead, and not realizing that hey, they needed to dig that hole because they're going to fill it with water soon and you're actually going to be able to swim in it.