Print

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

Dwarf Fortress

Minecraft

Both

[Max White]

One of the dudes I introduced DF to hated the game because in his words: "Dwarf mode was grinding dig with your miners for an hour, so you could then go grind other stuff. Adventure mode was pure stat-grinding."

That is because your friend isn't used to games with co win condition or direct story line. Because there are no landmark events, such as saving the princess or killing the evil overlord, all he sees what you get in between these events, and for most games, that is some form of this strange definition of 'grinding'. Even more so because dwarfs have skill levels. I'm willing to bet that if dwarfs were all equal at all tasks and didn't 'level up' then he wouldn't notice as much.

No, DF isn't just grinding, unless you play it like that, and if you are playing it like that it's because other games that involve grind, beat next boss, repeat have warped your mind to think like that.

[Shrugging Khan]

Shit. I just noticed I poured oil on something one might very well mistake for a fanboy flamewar in the defence of DF.

I just want to say that I'm not an unconditional loyalist fanboy trying to kiss up to the great toad, I really just think DF is better than MC (except for, you know, no MP and no 3D).

[GTM]

Better question:

DF and minecraft both on your comp... vs every other game that is being actively supported/sold/patched, combined.

[Graebeard]

If the right support were provided for these, then we'd quickly develop multiplayer and 3Dness. The 3d just requires passing the commands from the 3d client to Dwarf fortress. This doesn't seem to be too far off, and it might even already exist, I don't know since I don't use visualizers.

Tbh if we kept the 2d Interface & added another slot for 3d & the game being full screen it'd make a big difference, think stone sense but in the same window as DF & with animations, you still have the entire game just with a 3d representation alongside it, with the ability to turn the 3d bit off. I don't think DF would lose any of it's charm, the main way of finding out exactly what happened in a fight would be the Combat Reports, but there's a 3d bit making it easier to visualise.

Dwarf Fortress is (for the most part) operated by key commands.

As such, I don't see how a 3d Visualizer program isn't quite enough. Sure you then got two programs running, but as long as the visualizer can send the keyboard commands to Dwarf Fortress, then you have a 3D interface for the game, or at least the potential for one.

Herbiie has a really interesting point.

One of the biggest criticisms of the game is its interface.  I'm not sure that I completely agree.

An interface essentially has two functions.  The first is to allow the game to give you information.  The second is to allow you to pass information (instructions) back to the game.

In many ways the current interface is poor regarding the first function.  But regarding the second, I actually really like it, and I think it's very effective.  Sure, it takes a while to master, but I am able to work much faster with keyboard control than I am with a mouse.

So how about having one interface for each function?

Keep the current 2d interface to allow user input.  Maybe jazz it up with sprites ą la mayday.  This would allow for continued strong and precise control over the game.  Have another window with a 3d representation, either isometric like Stonesense or 3d like Fortress Overseer or Visual Fortress, that would allow users to see information from several z-levels at once.

I mean, we're pretty close to that right now with Stonesense anyway, right?  Just link the "new" visualizer to DF to allow for continuous updates (link Stonesense already does, I think) and add an option for slaving the 3d interface to the 2d interface.

This wouldn't necessarily require Toady to completely recreate the interface and figure out how to offer the same degree of control in a 3d environment that we have now in a 2d slice of that environment.  It might also lend itself well to parallel development if Toady ever wanted to bring more people in or offer more direct/explicit support for mods and utilities.

[breadbocks]

You guys DO realize that the moment Toady sees a 3rd party program that messes with the interface he's gonna make the interface more bizarre and complicated right? He has stated point blank that 4rd party programs are to not give game interfaces.

[Gatleos]

You guys DO realize that the moment Toady sees a 3rd party program that messes with the interface he's gonna make the interface more bizarre and complicated right? He has stated point blank that 4rd party programs are to not give game interfaces.

Source?

Apples > Oranges

You ever eat an orange pie?

That sounds really good... why can't DF be oranges?! They're so much better!

[KaelGotDwarves]

You guys DO realize that the moment Toady sees a 3rd party program that messes with the interface he's gonna make the interface more bizarre and complicated right? He has stated point blank that 4rd party programs are to not give game interfaces.

Source?

Toady's said multiple times he's not comfortable with any 3rd party interface programs that do too much "interfacing". Things like Dwarf therapist are great, but we've had actual incidences in the past where people were trying to reverse engineer DF code for their own games, specifically DF-clones/likes.

That being said, he hasn't gone out of his way to actively break or shut down any 3rd party programs. Just some douchy programmers got banned.

Interfacing program suggestion.

Yeah uhhhh... before there was this asshole *cough* Impaler *cough* making this one visualizer to steal DF code so that is why we can't have nice things. Toady's comfortable with stonesense as it is and the makers of stonesense have no intention of ever making it an interface for DF.

Bay12 history: the more you know.

[forsaken1111]

Still waiting on that source.

[KaelGotDwarves]

Pretty much every DFtalk and interview ever, man, not to mention posts on the forums. Question comes up all the time- but since you want text sources -

Reddit community Q&A
http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/cuvnl/tarn_adams_creator_of_dwarf_fortress_his_response/

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

metawhat
Would you consider adding an API to inspect/modify the data structures? We're doing well with shared memory abuses, but things would be a lot cleaner if we had an "official" method of gaining access. It would also be easier for you to add a new front end down the road if you decide to.

Toady:
It has come up in the past, and I just don't think it would be practical to maintain, since it would have to be fairly comprehensive to do what utilities do, especially if you consider things like visualizers. I'd also have to reveal more of the data structures than I'm comfortable with, as far as I can tell, for a comprehensive system.

latermuse
Under what circumstances would you ever consider releasing the game under creative commons or some other open source license? Would you do it if you were terminally ill and had 3 months to live?

Toady:
Donations for Dwarf Fortress are my sole source of income, and there's no reason to think that would continue to work out if I released the code. Asking me to take such a risk is unreasonable. It would probably be foolish for me to guess how I would react to the news that I'd soon be dead.

Eiii333
Would you like to see any significant changes in the UI and display in the (relatively) close future, or would you rather focus on more fully developing the gameplay first?

Toady:
I prefer adding new things. The eternal suggestion voting* items related to the UI are going in in the "close future" in that they are on the dev page while other things are not. I like all of those, although in the grand scheme of things it's not as cool to me as adding something like night creatures or fortress religious sects or whatever else.

http://www.hastac.org/blogs/elijahmeeks/procedural-humanities-interview-tarn-adams-creator-dwarf-fortress

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

The question of commons-based peer collaboration is brought up in the Dwarf Fortress community regularly, and you've made it clear that you don't plan to open the sourcecode of the game for collaborative effort.  There are also a number of third-party tools, visualizers and even interface code that you've shown support for.  How do you think all of this reflects the current state of the proprietary vs. free software debate?  What role does the community play in the development of this game?  Where do you see yourself in the game development continuum?

I don't know about the state of the larger debate, but for our project, we basically want people to be able to do what they like to the extent that it doesn't put us at financial risk.  We've been feeling around in the dark on that from the beginning pretty much though.  I can't say what would happen to me if the entire source were released, but it seems reckless enough that I'm sticking with the status quo.  If we were financially secure, the Dwarf Fortress code would likely be released.

Members of the community make suggestions, thoroughly test the game, find bugs, manage the bug tracker, contribute technical code, support the development financially through donations and word of mouth, help newcomers with their questions and give them a place to hang out and share stories and information, write articles for the wiki, host and produce and provide music and transcripts for the podcast, and I'm sure there are lots of things I'm forgetting.  They are the reason I've been able to make the step from hobbyist to full-time developer.

As far as the game development continuum goes, there are more and more people working now that are able to remain afloat making the games they want to make, and I think it's pretty cool.  Many people that go into the game industry end up in fairly soul-crushing environments and eventually switch professions.  I'm lucky to be able to run with whatever ideas we have and try new things.  There are any number of other ways to classify myself among the other game developers, but that's the most important thing to me.

DF is his livelihood right now, Toady being one of those rare indie game programmers that can make a sustainable living -Doing what he loves and giving it away for free, living off player donations- seems pretty reasonable for him to want to maintain control over his project. His vision has got us this far.

[forsaken1111]

I wasn't calling you a liar, just wanted a source. I hadn't seen that.

[Noble Digger]

You are right not to take breadbocks at his word on this. Source or it didn't happen. And your anecdote is -not- a source by any stretch of the imagination: quote Toady, or relent from claiming he said such a thing.

Personally, over the years I've donated hundreds of dollars to DF and I probably will continue. I'm just not playing it right now. I really don't like the lead dev of Minecraft in that way, he got $15 from me and that's all he ever will.

[Kogan Loloklam]

Bay12 history: the more you know.

Yes, I remember the Impaler incident. I'm not talking about stealing source though, I'm talking about sending commands to Dwarf Fortress, and presenting it's own image based on the output of the game. It's not really that hard, doesn't require anything not currently in some other tool or whatnot out there. Well maybe passing through the keyboard commands, since I don't recall any tool out there that sends keypress information to a different program.

Also, Toady never said anything about 3rd party interfaces directly. He's always focused on the support and source code aspect. Those he won't ever provide, so...

But something like stonesense that could pass keypress information on to Dwarf Fortress wouldn't be outside the realm of possibility. Since it would be a client and not an interface, the Dorfort window would still exist so there is no special support required. Those who have problems can be told what to do in the main window, and take their 3d client questions to wherever the 3d client is. It also doesn't require the source code I believe, but I really don't know what it takes to pass keypress information from one program to another.

Dwarf Fortress Multiplayer is what would require changes in the source. That's something we can't expect for awhile, since it would require a change to allow multiple operations in one Dorfort program. Realtime adventure mode would also be something pretty important too. It's not outside the realm of possibility, but it's not likely to happen anytime soon either.

[Aribar Hunter]

To go... Off topic? Back on topic? I have to say that Minecraft has 'stolen' be away from Dwarf Fortress. Especially now that the survival multiplayer has mostly caught up with the single player and it's relatively bug free (all from my own observations; your mileage may vary), it's essentially a streamlined Dwarf Fortress for me. I can be part of a community and contribute to the main bases on my server. I can take supplies from the large communal stockpiles (it doesn't take long for a group of 10 people to get tons of materials) and make my own projects. I can go out and cleanse the land of the undead menace at night. The lack of penalty with death can be a little annoying, but besides that everything that I want to do in Dwarf Fortress can be done in Minecraft.

I like Dwarf Fortress. It's a neat game. I liked the 2D versions better because it was more of a 'game'. It's a bit of a double standards thing, but I liked building up my fortress and having different milestones like the river, chasm, and magma. When the 3D versions came out, that really seemed like it was lost and the game seemed completely pointless. I don't know when the neat object testing arena was added, but I haven't played the Fortress mode since, but I've heard something like that is now back, but just vertically instead of horizontally. However, fighting with the interface and all the special rules and exceptions, even after I know how it all works, is an annoyance. All of the complexity with the different types of rocks and metals and such doesn't make the game more entertaining for me. Honestly, back when I was playing the game every day I was considering making a mod that got rid of most of the things in the RAWs to streamline things.

Dwarf Fortress is a neat game. I applaud Toady for his efforts and I still check up on the game's development every month or so to see if anything major's come up. However, its scope, interface, and execution just make it unattractive to me. I get faster results and have more fun with Minecraft. Doesn't mean it's for everyone, though, and I can see why people like Dwarf Fortress over it.

[Ullallulloo]

I like Dwarf Fortress better. Free, more stuff, and fortress mode. The only thing needed is either a better interface or a way to get one. Just make a way for a third party program to send it stuff.

[KaelGotDwarves]

Source or it didn't happen. And your anecdote is -not- a source by any stretch of the imagination: quote Toady, or relent from claiming he said such a thing.

See the sources posted above, lurk the forums, heck... google.

Anytime there's been a mention of 3rd party interfacing, the answer is clear. It's no.

Bay12 history: the more you know.

Yes, I remember the Impaler incident. I'm not talking about stealing source though, I'm talking about sending commands to Dwarf Fortress, and presenting it's own image based on the output of the game. It's not really that hard, doesn't require anything not currently in some other tool or whatnot out there. Well maybe passing through the keyboard commands, since I don't recall any tool out there that sends keypress information to a different program.

That's what Impaler was doing with his visualiser program, which surprise! was attempting to read DF keystroke input as a way to reverse engineer DF code and see the innerworkings of the program. You might say it's easy, it is hard to figure out all that stuff, because Toady hasn't made an interface API, so Peterix of DFhack fame and Japa and all the other guys working on DF interfacing programs are essentially shooting into the dark with memory offsets.

Also, Toady never said anything about 3rd party interfaces directly. He's always focused on the support and source code aspect. Those he won't ever provide, so...

He's said many times that he doesn't enjoy the idea of "essential 3rd party programs" for DF, he will NOT create an official API. He tolerates the current utilities because of deficiencies in the current DF interface, as long as they are not accessing too much of DF's inner workings.

But something like stonesense that could pass keypress information on to Dwarf Fortress wouldn't be outside the realm of possibility. Since it would be a client and not an interface, the Dorfort window would still exist so there is no special support required. Those who have problems can be told what to do in the main window, and take their 3d client questions to wherever the 3d client is. It also doesn't require the source code I believe, but I really don't know what it takes to pass keypress information from one program to another.

Peterix was temp-banned but later unbanned by Toady when Toady figured out that Impaler was using Peterix's work to backend DF. Jonask and the Stonesense team are not going to do it because 1. it's tough as hell and a bitch to maintain (Every update to DF breaks Stonesense as it already is) and 2. They respect Toady's wishes.

Dwarf Fortress Multiplayer is what would require changes in the source. That's something we can't expect for awhile, since it would require a change to allow multiple operations in one Dorfort program. Realtime adventure mode would also be something pretty important too. It's not outside the realm of possibility, but it's not likely to happen anytime soon either.

See the work on DFterm, and other utilities