Print

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

[random51]

I don't know why some people keep saying unplayable. I've spent pretty much 6-8 hours every other day playing the new version.

Sure there are a bunch of bugs. Damned if they do, damned if they don't on that one. Release later with less bugs and instead of this thread you create one about how long it has been since the last release.

Simple answer seems to be play the previous version if you find this one less entertaining. 40d didn't evaporate the moment 31.01 was released, did it?

[Calhoun]

ITT:

People complain about bugs in an alpha game, which hasn't gone through numerous bugfix releases like 40d had. Which they are comparing the stability / mostly bug lackingness.

The military system is hard to use.  The combat system is giving nonsensical results in relatively straightforward experiments.  The concern is not that there are bugs; I remember the sleeping-dwarf bug from the first 3D release.  Things like that were obviously going to be fixed inside a few weeks, it was just a matter of noticing them.  In this case, it isn't that it's an oversight, it's that it's been deliberately coded a certain way, and that certain way doesn't necessarily work very well.  There's a limit to how much fundamental behavior can be directed by bugs of the "oops I missed that" nature as opposed to "oops this whole thing was a bad idea and doesn't work".

The Military screen is fully Mouse-enabled. I'll admit you might not notice it if you weren't looking for it, and it's a bit clunky to navigate with the keyboard, but i don't find it hard to use, in of itself, i just find that things don't always quite work. (Bugs)

Some of it may be obscured by bugs.  It is possible that combat oddness will be fixed once correct values have been populated through the raws, and a few odd errors in the code are found and fixed.  Hopefully that is all that is required.  Right now I see no strong evidence either way, and that alone worries me - the product of a year and a half of work ought to be clearly visible in terms of results, instead of obscured in FUD.

You don't check out the modding board much, do you? There's already a project for balancing combat.

As for complaining about a free product, there's nothing wrong about that, and only somebody who's never made anything could possibly object.  Creators never have a completely objective view of their own work, they NEED feedback.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. You can't really complain about something you're getting for free. If you'd payed 50 bucks for DF, then maybe you could, because you'd have "wasted" you're money. You've lost nothing here.

[Robsoie]

A software of this kind of immense scope is bound to have bugs.

Releasing it instead of holding it back allows Toady to have a lot of bug hunters that can then report the bugs that could be missed by Toady. And have more feedback about the gameplay and system changes that will allow him to see better what is working and what is not working in term of game mechanics.

Some of the gameplay changes are not exactly my cup of tea, but i think it is more the bugs breaking them that are being annoying than those design changes, as after playing for a while i think i will get used to those changes.
The military development and the burrows are for me a great addition, once the bugs people have already reported with them and some of the path finding issue will be ironed out, i am sure it will shine even more.

The additions of the whole underground are really making the game much more fun to me and the battle system keep me more inside of the game than in the previous version in which sometime i felt the game could play alone at some point of my fortress development.
I sure miss the functionnalities Baughn had in 40d19 alot in DF2010, but apparently it is just a question of time  before they will be merged into 31.x.
So meanwhile i just continue to run a fortress in 40d19 in parrallel to my 31.x various disasters meanwhile to enjoy those 40d19 features.

So let's continue to report bugs and provide detailled and constructive feedback about the various gameplay and system changes, that's the best way for Toady to refine even more his fantastic dwarven software.

[Grumman]

The series of updates Toady planned would each break save compatiblity. To make things easier, he did it all at once. There should be a more rapid release schedule. We're already on the 2nd bugfix release.

My suggestion does not require breaking savegame compatibility with future versions. You could include all the same savegame infrastructure, and just not use the parts that relate to currently nonfunctional systems.

Sure there are a bunch of bugs. Damned if they do, damned if they don't on that one. Release later with less bugs and instead of this thread you create one about how long it has been since the last release.

I'm saying he should have released an earlier version, not later. Rather than not releasing a bug-free version unti 31.1x or whatever, Toady could have recognised that the old military system works, the new military system doesn't work, and released a version (let's call it 31.00) that is bug-free without actually doing any additional work.

Simple answer seems to be play the previous version if you find this one less entertaining. 40d didn't evaporate the moment 31.01 was released, did it?

No, but it's still bloody annoying for stable functionality that would make 40d a better game to be locked up as part of the buggy testing version.

[Boingboingsplat]

Sure there are a bunch of bugs. Damned if they do, damned if they don't on that one. Release later with less bugs and instead of this thread you create one about how long it has been since the last release.

I'm saying he should have released an earlier version, not later. Rather than not releasing a bug-free version unti 31.1x or whatever, Toady could have recognised that the old military system works, the new military system doesn't work, and released a version (let's call it 31.00) that is bug-free without actually doing any additional work.

Are you implying that the military system is what causes all the bugs in the current release? It sure seems like it.

[G-Flex]

You don't check out the modding board much, do you? There's already a project for balancing combat.

"Balancing combat" involves a hell of a lot more than what can be fixed via the raws. There are both fundamental and secondary issues involved in the way the game itself works in that area, which no amount of modding can properly compensate for.

I'm saying he should have released an earlier version, not later. Rather than not releasing a bug-free version unti 31.1x or whatever, Toady could have recognised that the old military system works, the new military system doesn't work, and released a version (let's call it 31.00) that is bug-free without actually doing any additional work.

There is almost no way this could possibly work. Virtually every aspect of new content has bugs, not just the military system. The combat has bugs, the wounds have bugs, the medical system has bugs, the underground has bugs, the materials themselves likely have some bugs, etc. This isn't me complaining, just saying that there's no way he could have just delayed features for the sake of a "bug-free" release unless he effectively delayed all of them. That, and it's quite silly to expect him to extract and delay features he had already integrated into the game. It is not that easy.

[Rotten]

How is a label stating that Dwarf Fortress is nowhere near done weird at all? Go read the dev log, 31 out of 100 cores (core components of the game) are considered 'done' by Toady, and many of those (like fire and the endgame) are still begging to be improved upon (and some, like abandoning, I think Toady has already said he will revisit). etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

That wasn't my point. The thing about DF is that it's also intended to be playable while in alpha, which is probably odd when compared to most "alpha" releases. I'm not saying that it's some terrible thing that the current version has problems; that's expected and fine. What I'm saying is that each major release, despite being "alpha" releases, are still worked into what is meant to be a playable game relatively free of major bugs. etc. etc. etc.

Oh. Well, ignore me then. Sorry.

I think most of the argument in this thread is really whether Toady should release buggy version or not. Essentially the people who say that the new military system/bugs/etc. make the game unplayable are basically arguing that only complete features should be released- in least in a release that takes this long- but I think that they kind of miss the point in that this was a massive release where many major features changed a lot, or are completely new. The fact that it will be buggy is basically assured- hell, we had "Predict the worst bugs" threads before the actual release! Though you have to wonder how some of the bugs (like unkillable inorganic creatures) got past the testers, I think overall it is an amazing release, especially for how rushed it became near the end.

[beorn080]

The series of updates Toady planned would each break save compatiblity. To make things easier, he did it all at once. There should be a more rapid release schedule. We're already on the 2nd bugfix release.

My suggestion does not require breaking savegame compatibility with future versions. You could include all the same savegame infrastructure, and just not use the parts that relate to currently nonfunctional systems.

I feel the need to poke you here. YOU have no idea how save games are written. To say he could make all the changes he has, and not break it once if he released slowly, is I don't even know. Yes, he could have released each section as he was done with it, possibly in the course of a week, possibly a month. Each time he released, it would break the previous versions saves. You would have had a year with constantly changing games, and no consistency. Oh, and lets not forget that the 40d# series would never have been worked on.

As for the old military system working, it didn't. It was almost a hack to let you kill things, not the end system. As a method to arm your dwarves and tell them to stand around, it worked wonders. To actually have a functioning military, with training, patrolling, and off duty scheduling, it could never have handled that.

The others, wardogs, traps, and marksdwarves, meh. The game is 31% done. I wouldn't be surprised if at 1.00 donkeys were the prominent defense strategy. Guess what, cage traps are still unbeatable. You can still build your ivory tower, and fling gobbos off of it. In fact, you can make your tower OUT OF IVORY without hacks now. Or goblin bone.

To sum it up, you are an ALPHA tester. You take the product you are handed, and mercilessly dissect it to find bugs and improvements. You don't have any real say in where it goes though. If Toady decides to make this an FPS, more power to him. It's HIS choice, you are merely here to test what he gives you to test.

[rdwulfe]

Though you have to wonder how some of the bugs (like unkillable inorganic creatures) got past the testers, I think overall it is an amazing release, especially for how rushed it became near the end.

I've been playing v31 since the first day it was released, several hours a day. Today was actually the first day I saw an unkillable monster. Some kind of salt-slug monster.... (Yeah, what?!) The thing killed all the animal people underground then sat and sulked in a corner, all red and wounded and undying.

So it's quite easy to miss random generated content, it all depends on your luck of the draw. That's the upside AND downside of procedurally generated content. Sometimes bugs hide for quite some time.

There's also the fact that Toady felt pressured to release this version of the game. He likely both wanted to, and didn't want to, but his fans dearly wanted new aspects of DF to play after such a long wait for new features. Personally, I say to all who do not like the current [feature], report bugs, politely explain what you do not like and why, and if enough people feel that you're right, and Toady agrees, a change *might* be made. If it is not, well.. That's the way the feature falls, folks. Toady has a vision for Dwarf Fortress. He's set out a roadmap and wants certain things to happen, while listening to our suggestions. This is his baby which he is nursing to life, his special project. If you like it, *awesome!!!* If you don't, be polite about explaining why.

Of course, his fans also need to be open to criticism.   It's not easy on either side of the fence.

[G-Flex]

So it's quite easy to miss random generated content, it all depends on your luck of the draw. That's the upside AND downside of procedurally generated content. Sometimes bugs hide for quite some time.

Not if you're testing properly. It took me a very short time of testing arena mode before I realized the most severe problems, and determined their probable causes.

This isn't to disparage the testers, though. I don't think we should assume what they did or didn't know about, or could know about at any given time, or what they did or didn't mention to Toady.

[Quatch]

ITT:

People complain about bugs in an alpha game, which hasn't gone through numerous bugfix releases like 40d had. Which they are comparing the stability / mostly bug lackingness.

OT:
Seriously, Yeah, they're are a lot of bugs and balancing issues. And they will be dealt with.

Can anyone argue that any of the new features make the game worse? Personally i consider the almost ridicilous amount of military control a great thing. The new underground? Nothing short of Epic. Statues/figurines. Love em'! Plethora of new Creature tags / descriptors? WOW! New weapon/armor materials system. Hell Yeah! Healthcare? Genious! Burrows? OH THE POSSIBILITIES!


Seriously. It's insane. No one as any right to be disappointed at Toady, or angry, or anything.
Perhaps the biggest reason is that he provides this amazing game to humanity for the cost of $0. Sure, he get's lot's of donations, but they aren't compulsory, and it just shows how great the game is, EVEN as an unfinished product.

If you can't handle the bugs, The old version is STILL there. Just play it until we get the same amount of bugfxing that that version went through.

Toady, I just wanna say right now. Thanks. Holy shit, thanks. I can't thank you enough. Keep up the sublime work.

(I rage'd a bit, but I don't feel BAD about it.)

My sentiments, exactly. Happily playing away here.

Bugs and re-balancing are needed, but we expected that, and are delighted with a release now, rather than letting all of this get smoothed away privately. I sincerely hope people moaning, as seen in this thread, at Toady do not discourage him.

[o_O[WTFace]]

Well first WE are the testing department so if you encounter bugs you are doing it right. 

The current system is going to magically improve once a few bugs are fixed.  Dwarves not training, marxdwarves not carrying bolts, dwarves not equipping, dwarves charging into combat with training weapons, dwarves spending all their time swapping out equipment, greedy capitalist healthcare bugs  - Thats why goblins are so tough. 

Combat balance is going to take many releases though.  Thats why most games just use some kind of HP system, its easy and straightforward and gives simple feedback. 

[DarkDragon]

I wish I could test more of the bugs and report, but unfortunately one of the bugs is preventing me from playing.

After hitting year 2 I get constant crashes that render the game unplayable. It must just be me because everyone else seems to be able to have a successful fort (up to the point it gets killed by some uber mega beast), but mine just crash themselves to death after the second year.

I've bug reported it, but the savegame I posted hasn't even been downloaded.

So obviously it's not being looked at, and I can't play the game even to test out features and report because I can't get to the point the game even introduces the features.

So yea, I'm pissed right now, and I think it's perfectly legitimate to post about such issues, alpha or not.

Without people pointing out the flaws they will never get fixed. And this guys post (and mine) are not that inflammatory. And frankly, I'm sick and tired of people hopping to the defense of the game whenever someone posts a somewhat negative comment. Without negative feedback things do not improve, they just grow stale, so STFU unless someone is actually being a complete jerk and not just venting their concerns about the game and the issues it has.

[Skorpion]

Yes, there are bugs. Toady is one man, he can't find them all.
However, he has a bunch of people just WAITING to test and report. The audience. He releases it, we play, we report, he fixes.

Also, think about this:
How much did you pay for this game? Nothing.
Did you have to jump through hoops of DRM for this game? No.

Now, think about how many game companies CHARGE you for buggy untested piles of crap. And how many times you have to log into three things and stay online to play something that involves no online stuff whatsoever?

Also, if you want simple, you're playing the wrong game. If you want bugs fixed, QUIT WHINING ABOUT SLOW RELEASES.

[Kza]

I'm on 40d, but only waiting because I have a current fortress and for a good military guide to be written (I'm fairly new and just got truely used to the current system). I honestly don't think this new version is all that bad according to people. Yeah, bugged, but what did you expect? This isn't a company that can hire 27 game testers.