Print

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

[Motigg]

I noted Torchlight before.  It was made by 14 people over 11 months.  They had no publisher backing them, just money they had made themselves from previous successes.

Imagine a handful of talented developers who've made enough money to support themselves for a while, have seen DF, think they can do better and capitalize on it.  It's not that far-fetched.

Torchlight is ...... considerably less complex than DF. By a very large factor.

If was also done by the same programmers that did Diablo.  They already had the money and knew exactly what was needed in the code.  It wasn't exactly hard for them.

[thezeus18]

I noted Torchlight before.  It was made by 14 people over 11 months.  They had no publisher backing them, just money they had made themselves from previous successes.

Imagine a handful of talented developers who've made enough money to support themselves for a while, have seen DF, think they can do better and capitalize on it.  It's not that far-fetched.

Torchlight is ...... considerably less complex than DF. By a very large factor.

If was also done by the same programmers that did Diablo.  They already had the money and knew exactly what was needed in the code.  It wasn't exactly hard for them.

It was also done by the same programmers that did FATE, the game of which it is an identical replica with updated graphics.

[LoSboccacc]

You play with the same fort design?

well, can't speak for him but the bedroom design is almost always the same. the most variations come in the entrance and fields, and that in turns causes some adaptation on where the workshop and stockpiles are, but there aren't so many ways to create packed bedrooms, specially if you do that by hand you'll need a design which is fast to replicate and easy to draw

I'm not using macro tools, but I'm too addicted to dwarf therapist. I wish there were a tool for managing productions, so I can attach skill level to work orders.... the workshop profile thing is useful only if you queue up orders by hand.

[ggeezz]

I noted Torchlight before.  It was made by 14 people over 11 months.  They had no publisher backing them, just money they had made themselves from previous successes.

Imagine a handful of talented developers who've made enough money to support themselves for a while, have seen DF, think they can do better and capitalize on it.  It's not that far-fetched.

Torchlight is ...... considerably less complex than DF. By a very large factor.

If was also done by the same programmers that did Diablo.  They already had the money and knew exactly what was needed in the code.  It wasn't exactly hard for them.

It was also done by the same programmers that did FATE, the game of which it is an identical replica with updated graphics.

I don't want to get too far off track here, but a large chunk of effort in a game like Torchlight goes to art assets.  And while DF is far more complex, much of that complexity isn't fully realized in gameplay . . . yet.

They would need to strike a balance between implementing features that make DF great now (and even some things that aren't in yet) and leaving out things that take too long, while also having a high level of polish.  IMO, it's well within the realm of possibility.

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

You play with the same fort design?

When the new versions are coming out this frequently, yeah A more accurate way to describe it would be that I have a few standard "modules" -- a tomb level, a bedroom level, a workshop level, etc. -- that I fit together in different ways depending on terrain. Only thing that changes is farms and storage.

I do tend to be kind of picky about my fort sites to make sure it all fits. I'll probably come up with a new fort design once I finish a fort out using this one, but I haven't been able to do that yet due to bugs, version changes, etc.

edit: as to specific designs --  For bedrooms I use a circular layout plan (stolen from a poster here named Caramel, available here: http://i48.tinypic.com/fodppu.jpg); workshops and tombs are based on some of the fractal designs on the wiki, modified so that all rooms are 3x3, and with widened hallways. Just plotting everything out in Quickfort took several days -- hand-designating each time I built a new fort would be prohibitive, I'd have gotten fed up and deleted my DF install long ago.

[Jiri Petru]

What's needed NOW I think is some basic overhaul of the interface. Nothing too fancy, just streamlining and reorganizing what's already there. The current UI is absolutely unusable and it's a fact. Even if you say you don't mind it, I don't think you really do use it - you memorize all the hotkeys and then hide the interface. Which in itself is a proof of how bad the interface is.

And the argument that "DF is only alpha, it doesn't need an interface" is wrong on all accounts. Version 1 is how many... 20 years in the future? Even if Toady would have to make an interface now and then rewrite it from scratch 20 years from now, I don't think it's such a big deal! Yeah, it would cost time but it would also mean player's won't have to struggle with the mess that we have now for another 20 years.

I also believe doing interface as an afterthought is just a bad design. You should always think of the interface before you start implementing a feature. Doing some rudimentary interface redesign NOW would force Toady to spend time maintaining it, yes. But that's a good thing! It would also force him to spend more time thinking about interface issues and streamlining the controls before he actually writes them, which is a good thing! Otherwise, 20 years from now he might end up with such a mess that would simple be irreparable. Doing interface now and then maintaining it could actually result in saving time. Better to spend more time thinking about controls before you write them than rewriting them afterwards.

So this thread got me thinking and I came up with a simple, basic interface which I believe could be acceptable for 1.0. Nothing fancy, just streamlining and reorganization. You can find it in the usual thread, feel flee to jump in.

The way I see it Toady needs to start thinking about the interface as soon as possible, then write some basic redesign of features he want to have in, and then set a near deadline to complete it all. Now is not a good time because of the long delay before .31. But say 2 years from now would be good (and necessary).

[Deathworks]

Hi!

What's needed NOW I think is some basic overhaul of the interface. Nothing too fancy, just streamlining and reorganizing what's already there. The current UI is absolutely unusable and it's a fact. Even if you say you don't mind it, I don't think you really do use it - you memorize all the hotkeys and then hide the interface. Which in itself is a proof of how bad the interface is.

Unfortunately, the only proof I see in the above paragraph is that you do not really know what an interface is and how the interface of Dwarf Fortress actually works. Being a rogue-like, Dwarf Fortress is keyboard-driven. Those are not hotkeys in the sense you are using, but actually the command keys. In your average rogue-like, you find the keybindings somewhere in the manual (see adventure mode of Dwarf Fortress for an example). The interface of fortress mode provides you with an overview over the command keys - while it is part of the user interface as it is information displayed by the program, it is NOT a part of the input side of the interface. You can't click on that overview for any results and you can't select items from it via cursor-keys or any other means. It is a non-interactive, basically static piece of information (for player convenience, it does automatically hide some information that is currently not of interest, but that's about it).

And knowing the command keys is the proper way to use a rogue-like. Or do you want to tell me that everyone who knows the command keys for Angband by heart is playing Angband the wrong way, for instance?

You may not believe it and you may dislike it, but there are people (including myself) who do genuinely like a keyboard driven interface.

Deathworks

[Jiri Petru]

Adventure mode is rogue-like. Fortress mode isn't rogue-like in any way except "graphics", it's Settlers-like. Anyway, Deathworks, while everything you say is true it doesn't mean the interface can't and shouldn't be improved. Even text-based interfaces can be helpful and not obfuscated. See the link in my post. (EDIT: I've specifically prepared a proposal of keyboard only interface after our last discussion  )

You may not believe it and you may dislike it, but there are people (including myself) who do genuinely like a keyboard driven interface.

The thing is people like you don't need an interface. You memorize the shortcuts and hide the menu... which is allright, nice for you, but please don't stay in the way of people who'd like useful menus. Nothing would change for you since you would hide them anyway, so where's the problem?

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

Being a rogue-like, Dwarf Fortress is keyboard-driven.  . . .
You may not believe it and you may dislike it, but there are people (including myself) who do genuinely like a keyboard driven interface.

There's certainly some validity to this and people who want to play DF with a keyboard driven interface should be able to. The problem is that calling DF a "roguelike" at this point makes about as much sense as calling World of Warcraft a "roguelike" because it has dungeons and magic and items. Roguelikes are dungeon-crawl games; DF is a sim game / rts, and it's getting to the point of complexity where it needs a RTS/sim style interface to make it playable.

 Regardless of whether it's keyboard driven or mouse driven, I should have a screen where I can look at all my dwarves' skills and currently enabled jobs at once, I should be able to save fortress designs for future use, etc.

[Deathworks]

Hi!

I think we are getting some issues confused here, so I hope I can clarify some things:

Dr. Hieronymous Alloy: As far as I know, Dwarf Fortress has developed out of a rogue-like, which is why I give it that status. Anyhow, even if it was not technically a rogue-like anymore, my point was actually about the nature of the keyboard-driven interface - which is typical for rogue-likes, but can be used in any other game as well, theoretically.

But the more important thing is your second paragraph, and I don't see how my interests collide with yours: My main interest is that Dwarf Fortress remains keyboard driven at its core (that is, the game is designed so as to be used keyboard driven, which does not exclude optional mouse support). I am also not opposed to improvements to the interface WITHIN that parameter (that is that it works with keyboard) and I am also not opposed to the additional features you describe. The only thing I am opposed to are people who claim that Dwarf Fortress must become a GUI game by default (that is designed for mouse usage with optional keyboard controls).

So, I think the two of us can get along with our wishes.

Jiri Petru: I think you should look more carefully at what I quoted:

What's needed NOW I think is some basic overhaul of the interface. Nothing too fancy, just streamlining and reorganizing what's already there. The current UI is absolutely unusable and it's a fact. Even if you say you don't mind it, I don't think you really do use it - you memorize all the hotkeys and then hide the interface. Which in itself is a proof of how bad the interface is.

You said there that the user interface is unusable.
I have pointed out that it is usable for some people, including myself.

You said that we don't use the interface because we know the hotkeys by heart.
I have pointed out that these are command keys and not hotkeys and that knowing them by heart is normal for that kind of interface, so we are using it.

By the way, I don't hide the overview for various reasons, so even that guess of yours was incorrect.

And after these three incorrect assumptions, you deduct that because of these incorrect assumptions, the interface has been proven to be bad.
And since I have pointed out that the assumptions are not correct, that deduction is also not correct.

Or to be more blunt: You made several statements about how I use the interface, statements which I felt were incorrect and I spoke up to correct that. Read again that paragraph: Putting it harshly, you are calling us liars as you say we don't use the interface. I hope you can understand that I felt the need to respond.

EDIT: In addition, personally, I don't see the need for an interface overhaul now, especially after seeing the positive reactions of people lately. You may remember the thread where I actually asked about the pro-faction a while ago, but there has been a similar incident recently in the suggestions forum:

http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=54470.0

Now, with that explanation out of the way, let's place the two of us on the board again, will we?

You want to be able to use the mouse to control the game (which is currently not supported by the game in any reasonable way). I want to be able to use the keyboard to control the game (which is what the current interface is like).

Now, as I mentioned above, I am not opposed to optional mouse control as long as it does not hinder keyboard usability. So, I agree with you, that from that perspective, there is no need for us to fight. If you get your mouse support while I can still play the game the keyboard way, all are happy.

However, if people make general statements about that the game has to go for GUI, making that statement as a universally true fact, that rubs me the wrong way. I have no problem with you saying that you don't like the current interface and that you honestly believe that a GUI would improve your Dwarf Fortress experience significantly. Those are things that I have to assume are true, because you know better than I what you think. However, presenting your feelings as universal is where it crosses the line.

So, all I really want is that you respect that there are indeed people who have different feelings and not try to undermine them or cast doubt on their honesty. The community playing Dwarf Fortress and just as there are people who can't play without graphic packs, there are others whose eyes bleed when they see the graphic sets; there are people who can't play without their tool of choice and then there are those who never touch such a tool; there are those who enjoy mistreating their dwarves and those who are protective of them; and there are those who like the keyboard driven interface and there are those who can't stand it. Personally, I think we can get the most out of the community if we respect our differences and maybe try to find ways to make everyone happy where our interests meet (how you play your fortress does not have much impact on me, but if the interface was changed, that would have impact on other people, so taking other people's thoughts into account becomes more important, I think).

Deathworks

[Jiri Petru]

Sorry about that, Deathworks, I never intended to brand you as a liar or anything. OK, you like the current interface, I get it now  The thing is a lot of people don't, and I've tried to come up with suggestions how to improve it.

My post above - the one where I sayed the interface needs an overhaul no later than two years from now - was written with keyboard-only interface in mind. No mouse support, no GUI until version 1.0. Just some (IMHO) necessary streamlining of what we have now. I personally would love mouse and GUI, of course, but I realize it's not feasible for Toady.

To put it shortly: I believe the interface is terrible even for a keyboard driven interface and that it should be redesigned to a better keyboard-driven interface as soon as possible. I also believe it would actually save Toady much headaches later. Just my two cents, of course. 

[Deathworks]

Hi!

Ah, that is good. Then we do have peace (and I like having peace in communities).

As I said, I am not opposed to improvements to the keyboard-driven interface (liking something does not mean you are not open to improvements), so I am not opposed to your effort to come up with ideas of how to improve things.

And I actually have to agree somewhat with you statements about headaches later on: You see, my concern about the GUI is exactly because of that aspect - the user interface can have influence on how a game works/is designed. As such, the interface is part of the design process. However, that is a somewhat indirect influence, but an influence nonetheless.

However, personally, I still don't see really an urgent need for an overhaul now, even just with the keyboard controls (I think a lot of the trouble people are having right now will be gone once the military actually always does what you tell it to do), but that is just my personal assessment.

Depending on how much free time I have, I may check out your thread and see if I can contribute something to the discussion (since you claim that you are talking about improving the keyboard interface, I am optimistic about my involvement).

Greetings from a fellow Dwarf Fortress fan.

Deathworks

EDIT: clarified the statement about the overhaul.

[sweitx]

Sorry about that, Deathworks, I never intended to brand you as a liar or anything. OK, you like the current interface, I get it now  The thing is a lot of people don't, and I've tried to come up with suggestions how to improve it.

My post above - the one where I sayed the interface needs an overhaul no later than two years from now - was written with keyboard-only interface in mind. No mouse support, no GUI until version 1.0. Just some (IMHO) necessary streamlining of what we have now. I personally would love mouse and GUI, of course, but I realize it's not feasible for Toady.

To put it shortly: I believe the interface is terrible even for a keyboard driven interface and that it should be redesigned to a better keyboard-driven interface as soon as possible. I also believe it would actually save Toady much headaches later. Just my two cents, of course.

I would agree with that, a more/consistent and intuitive keyboard-based interface is preferable.  Thou to help Toady, we need to compile a list on what we feel is wrong with the current keyboard interface (of course, at this stage, complicated suggestion revolving around mouse based interface should not be given).

[Greiger]

Ok, my gut instinct says to avoid this interface debate like the plague, but I can't resist.

I like the keyboard driven interface, and I don't memorize every key and do still need to have the menu handy to find the keys I need on occasion.  I only have the most used ones memorized, like a, b-c, r, k, t, and a few other things like that that would probably be easier to memorize the key shortcuts for than click in a mouse interface anyway.  Like ctrl-c and ctrl-v in editors.   I also don't really see anything wrong with the interface.  But that's probably just 3 years experience playing DF talking, and it didn't bother me starting out since before I found DF I was playing marathon Hengband games.  Hell compared to hengband I thought DF fortress mode keys were rather well documented.

But all these people, complaining of the interface can't all be wrong.  And I agree that DF Fortress mode isn't really a rougelike, at least not a traditional one.  But Toady does seem to make modifications to the interface from time to time.  Remember how in 40d it was a toss up weather escape, space or F9 would leave a menu?  And now it's mostly just escape or F9?  What was the first thing people did when that change was made at the request of a large portion of the community?  Complain.  Sure I suppose an improvement to the interface could be in order, and I could get behind it.  But a complete 5 star rewrite putting the interface on par with most commercial products would be a waste of time at this point, and unfortunately unless a interface like that is made people will always complain about it.

Summary: Unless Toady makes a top quality interface people will always complain about it.  And a top quality interface isn't worth it at this point when it's just going to be taken apart and have to be modified with every new feature.  A small interface improvement could be nice, but it won't stop complaining, and at any rate it's Toady's decision.  It's a free game.  Toady doesn't owe anybody anything.  He could stop developing DF tomorrow and go back to his (likely high paying) job as Dr Adams at a university.  There would be nothing anybody could do about it.

P.S. And no Jiri I'm not trying to shoot down your interface improvements. You are actually trying to do something about it.  And from your mockups I am actually quite impressed, I would like something like that.  But I'm sure folks will still find something to complain about with it. And as you said, right now isn't quite the time for an interface rewrite anyway.  At least not until these bugs are worked out.


EDIT Good god, 4 replies while I was typing

[Deathworks]

Hi!

Greiger: The example with the space bar is very good indeed.

However, there is one statement I think is not quite right:

But all these people, complaining of the interface can't all be wrong.

Personally, I think an important thing here is that there is no "wrong" or "right" in this discussion (setting aside bugs, of course). Everyone has their own way of playing Dwarf Fortress and thus people have different needs and the interface relates differently to those needs...

While those who are not Angband-damaged like the two of us may feel that the interface is no good for them, this does not mean they are wrong or we are wrong. We are all just different.

OT: Just for clarification: Given that I am really lousy at rogue-likes, when I say Angband talking about my own experience, I am actually referring to variants that potentially made it easier or more flavory for me (the Cthulhu one, Skillband, Animeband, or Cat And The Hack Angband). I never really got a foot into the vanilla version and stayed clear of Ironman and the like - yes, I am a casual player :) :) :)

Deathworks