Print

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

[Leafsnail]

Or bey@nd quality, depending on when you look.

[Im_Sparks]

</Thread>

Toady will update it when he wants to.

Also, I'm pretty sure the entirety of 4chan's /tg/ knows about Dwarf Fortress, so that's a pretty large base.

[Maggarg - Eater of chicke]

The website is good.
It has buttons, and you can navigate.

[InsanityPrelude]

It could be prettier (especially the main Bay12Games page), but it's functional.

[Armok]

I don't think the site really needs improving, if the great toad however would decide to do so, please know that I could be deeply honoured if I could contribute in any way. I could probably help whit artwork and possibly more general design as well. *bows deeply*

[BloodBeard]

I think it's pretty good as is, however the screenshot section badly needs updating. Graphics aren't what DF is about, but many of those screenshots are from the 2D version. We need pictures of things like magma pipes, chasms, advanced fortress layouts and waterfalls. Anything that shows off the incredible depth of the landscape.

[PencilinHand]

I think it's pretty good as is, however the screenshot section badly needs updating. Graphics aren't what DF is about, but many of those screenshots are from the 2D version. We need pictures of things like magma pipes, chasms, advanced fortress layouts and waterfalls. Anything that shows off the incredible depth of the landscape.

I see what you did there....
---------

I think the websites are fine.  Functional, navigable, but ugly, perfect for DF at this stage I think.  Of course, Toady will do whatever he wants to....

[Capntastic]

I received a caustically sarcastic message from the OP apparently deriding me for being rude by not sharing his opinion that everything Toady does requires fan input.  I myself disagree, and think it's pretty presumptuous to think that more or less saying 'your website is terrible, you should make it better, it doesn't need to be flashy though, just not painful on the eyes' is particularly constructive, or going to engender much support from the community or Toady himself.

Regardless, I don't really think the site's lack of Web 2.0 sensibilities is hurting anything.   Considering that it exists mostly as a place to read dev updates and download the game, it doesn't need to have cascading style sheets and javascript widgets.  Most of the meat of the community is on the wiki and forums, the latter of which Toady went through the trouble of overhauling quite recently.

Feel free though, to compare Bay12's site with www.nethack.org , www.adom.de , www.dungeoncrawl.org , www.ivan.sourceforge.net or comparable games in the roguelike family tree.   

[LegoLord]

Yeah, the OP does seem a bit course in what he says.  And you know what?  I look at those pages, and I see nothing wrong.  They're all pretty self-explanatory.  Now I've seen flashy web pages that I suppose might seem well-designed at a glance, if you only look at back ground, but are hard as hell to move around on and they are the only ones that look bad to me.  Plus, no one seems to really say why it looks "terrible."  Just that it supposedly does.

[Zironic]

You knew this was going to come. But first, look at the two offending pieces of evidence.

Of course, the real answer is that Toady and Threetoe haven't had the time to do it, as it takes an amount of time and effort they can't divert from attending to our beloved dwarves. So you could put this among the list of topics such as multicore support, the interface/graphics overhaul, etc... that are always classified as "not a priority, since it is not about gameplay".

On the contrary. Gameplay is the sum of all the experiences you go through while playing a videogame, and if you are given a "our website is intentionally terrible, just like the games we create" impression before even downloading the game, you might put off the person to the point of her not giving it even a first shot.

Or, you could give Dwarf Fortress the modern, aesthetical, befitting webpage worth of its excellency. It doesn't need to be flashy, as long as it replaces the current first look at Bay12 and Dwarf Fortress. It's not like people are going to get disappointed by the game if its graphics don't live up to a website that presents itself decently. If the first download of the game counts, then so does the first front page load. And with the popularity and publicity Dwarf Fortress is now getting, you can't keep pretending it still has the status of your run-of-the-mill alpha game.

What do you think?

It takes mere milliseconds to load these pages. I'd suffer for speed over any complex webpage any day.

[Armok]

It takes mere milliseconds to load these pages. I'd suffer for speed over any complex webpage any day.

Seconded.

[Javis]

Please, for Armok's sake, no Flash!

[nagual678]

I received a caustically sarcastic message from the OP apparently deriding me for being rude by not sharing his opinion that everything Toady does requires fan input.

Why don't you post your first contribution to this thread and the message I sent to you, just so we all have a clearer notion of how you are just a troll. If you don't agree that people should be discussing this subject (I return the "who are you to say" comment), then why don't you just put your money where your mouth is and refrain from contributing?

Yeah, the OP does seem a bit course in what he says.

If I seem coarse in my criticism I apologize, as it needs not be taken too seriously. I did however try to elicit some discussion and taking a stance is the first path towards that. If that kicks things around and we get some people volunteering, why not? Nobody is forced to do anything, but why not entertain the idea?

It takes mere milliseconds to load these pages. I'd suffer for speed over any complex webpage any day.

Seconded.

You are assuming any change to the page would make it sluggish or slower. This is inaccurate. A page doesn't need to be crude and simplistic to enjoy fast loading times.

[Capntastic]

Why don't you post your first contribution to this thread and the message I sent to you, just so we all have a clearer notion of how you are just a troll. If you don't agree that people should be discussing this subject (I return the "who are you to say" comment), then why don't you just put your money where your mouth is and refrain from contributing?

"Why does everyone feel that they're required to pick apart every little thing related to DF?"

To which you messaged me:  "Thanks for elevating the discussion. Your contribution has been duly noted!"

You can't legitimately call me a troll for disagreeing with you and the tides of people who feel the need to demand things from Toady simply because he actually tries to listen to his community.  I feel that a dissenting opinion would help the intended recipient of your rant get a more complete sense of what the community wants.  So really, you seem to be more upset that I don't agree with you than my supposed lack of contribution.   

Edit:  You try to paint me as being against this thread, when I'm indeed glad that people are discussing this issue, since most people seem to be against the idea.   Think of that what you will.

[Untelligent]

I still haven't figured out what the OP doesn't like about the Dwarf Fortress homepage. Care to enlighten us or point me in the direction of the post I missed explaining that?