Print

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

[NW_Kohaku]

Wow. I guess it's really hard to listen to an audio file, eh?

Being able to read something can be much easier, but its even more useful to have the ability to search for things. 

Especially if you are trying to look for something Toady said about a particular topic a year ago to try to see what he thinks about that certain topic (you can't remember everything) - you're just not going to be able to sit through every single DF Talk in a row listening for the one time he mentions the one thing you were looking for.

And again, often times, when people try to refer back to, say, how Toady wants to impliment artifacts or magic, then you'll go searching, and find that DF Talk #9 doesn't really describe much besides flaming swords in a couple sentences before the topic shifts again - maybe it's fun for people who want to listen to "fireside chatting", but it's not a real substitute for a Q&A.

I'll point out that Rainseeker was out of line to say you're not a contributing member of the community- he was misinformed. But you can't deny that you're acting pretty petulant here, concerning something we've expended a bit of time and effort to produce, and pretty much crying that we halt production on something a lot of people enjoy simply because you don't like it.  I don't blame him for getting defensive, especially since it's something I've done in the past.  So yeah.  People should just calm down.

I don't think DF Talks should stop, by any means, but rather that it shouldn't become THE prime focus of Toady's time, to the detriment of other means of seeing where Toady is going with the game. 

In the torrent of people saying "yay, another DF Talk", I wanted to say that not everyone finds it useful, and that not everyone really enjoys them.  I have no idea how many people download DF Talk or enjoy it or disagree with something, but if everyone who comes into these threads are only allowed to express unanimous praise for DF Talks, then it starts to create some false impressions that everyone uses and loves it.

[Genoraven]

Firefox crashes when i try to download.

[Capntastic]

I don't think DF Talks should stop, by any means, but rather that it shouldn't become THE prime focus of Toady's time, to the detriment of other means of seeing where Toady is going with the game. 

One afternoon out of a month hardly makes it the focus of Toady's time, and it's not a detriment to anything.  We welcome criticism, but usually people making them have actually listened to the recordings and have specific things they take issue with- things that can be fixed-, rather than "I don't like listening to it".  We can't do anything about you hating them, since it's your personal preferences in play rather than anything we've done.  It isn't helpful to go "Another one? Why couldn't we focus Toady's responses to the fanbase in a more useful/readable format than DFTalk?" in response to a kinda-monthly podcast.  As previously shown, Toady has a lot of channels open between himself and the community, and if you choose to pretend they aren't there, and that Toady's hidden himself away behind DF Talk, there's really nothing that can be done.

[Neonivek]

Also Toady isn't a robot.

I have a feeling if we set up more cameras in Toady's house people would complain that he chews cerial too much.

I am surprised he rarely if ever gives himself a vacation.

[Mel_Vixen]

I love the talks. Aside from the Technical and detailed stuff we see on FotF and the devblog its really the best way to communicate the ideas behind features and DF as a whole.

Would it be possible to reduce the noise a bit? I dont know if its some Kind of compression artifacts or the cheap Microphones but i would like to hear The DF talk in HD soundquality XD.

[monk12]

Re: Existence of DF Talk (previously Dwarf Fortress Talk #12: Feedback)

Oh you.

In regards to the meta discussion, I hardly think DF Talk is in any danger of monopolizing the time of Toady and associated members, and I don't think I really need to defend the format after the Cap'n did such an eloquent job of it (with an admirably clear, level head I might add.)

I find it something of a Funny Aneurysm Moment that this DF Talk lead off with a joke about how DF Talk "entertains us at the sacrifice of [the crew's] lives!" "I wouldn't be that dramatic." "Well, a couple hours." Toady: "Except for this, I didn't have a lot goin' on, but I'm sure it will color the rest of my day and make it all the more productive"

As regards the ACTUAL THREAD, I haven't finished listening to it yet and as usual I've zoned in and out, so I'll be more vocal about content once the transcript is up (thank you very much mallocks.) I'm certainly much more excited about Taverns than I was (Release 3 is looking to be a good one!) especially since one of my fondest wishes is for everything in the game to have some purpose- instruments and games as something other than Vendor Trash makes me giggle like a schoolgirl. I also applaud whoever threw in the audio gag with the background music right around that discussion. And as long as I'm rambling, I'm looking forward to Bandits rolling into town like an old west movie, and the Sheriff and his posse follow them around to make sure they don't make trouble, or maybe a rival bandit group rolls in and starts a fight when they find the first one already in the tavern, and suddenly your sheriff has Justice to dispense on somebody other than some poor metalsmith who couldn't come up with nickle for a mandate.

If it is possible to get an answer without fanning the flames, is there any particular reason for the short(ish) interval between this Talk and the last one? I'm not at all displeased, mind you, but since it has been released along with the latest Release, I feel a bit like I did as a kid and saw too many presents under the Christmas Tree.

[Kadzar]

Re: Existence of DF Talk (previously Dwarf Fortress Talk #12: Feedback)

Oh you.

It was actually Toady One who changed the topic name. Since the original topic was derailed so hard, discussion of Dwarf Fortress Talk #12 should take place here.

[monk12]

Re: Existence of DF Talk (previously Dwarf Fortress Talk #12: Feedback)

Oh you.

It was actually Toady One who changed the topic name. Since the original topic was derailed so hard, discussion of Dwarf Fortress Talk #12 should take place here.

Oh hey, lookie there. COPYPASTA AWAY!

[NW_Kohaku]

One afternoon out of a month hardly makes it the focus of Toady's time, and it's not a detriment to anything.  We welcome criticism, but usually people making them have actually listened to the recordings and have specific things they take issue with- things that can be fixed-, rather than "I don't like listening to it".  We can't do anything about you hating them, since it's your personal preferences in play rather than anything we've done.  It isn't helpful to go "Another one? Why couldn't we focus Toady's responses to the fanbase in a more useful/readable format than DFTalk?" in response to a kinda-monthly podcast.  As previously shown, Toady has a lot of channels open between himself and the community, and if you choose to pretend they aren't there, and that Toady's hidden himself away behind DF Talk, there's really nothing that can be done.

It is certainly fair to say that I've let my annoyance over things that have occurred in the FotF thread, and my frustrations reading/scouring the DF Talks in the past for information color my response to more DF Talks, and for that, I was wrong.  I apologize for expressing my frustrations in the way I did, and that first post was in error.

As for the DF Talks "not existing", again, I am not suggesting that at all, and have no idea where that hyperbole arose.  It's merely that I don't think we should be continuing to tell people to take their questions to DF Talk all the time whenever they try to ask questions in other places.

This, however, still leaves Rainseeker's response that nobody else is contributing, at least in a way that he considers contributing, unless that person is "contributing" by praising him or DF Talks, or that if I don't like DF Talks, I should just "GTFO" the entire game of DF unexcused.  The level of disdain he is showing for the entire community is apalling.

[ahonek]

As for the DF Talks "not existing", again, I am not suggesting that at all, and have no idea where that hyperbole arose.

Here's from where it arose:

Another one?  Why couldn't we focus Toady's responses to the fanbase in a more useful/readable format than DFTalk?

[NW_Kohaku]

Keyword "focus".

[Phenixmirage]

Keyword "focus".

"Focus" tends to imply an exclusion of other things. Given the tone of your posts, it's not unreasonable to get the idea that you'd rather not see anymore DF Talks.

[Askot Bokbondeler]

i for one was disappointed by rainseeker's comment, and i'm on the "dftalk is awesome" side of the discussion. it was a really low move

[Levi]

Semi-related, it would be nice if the transcripts were not bright white on a dark brown background.  Its a little hard on the eyes.

[NW_Kohaku]

Semi-related, it would be nice if the transcripts were not bright white on a dark brown background.  Its a little hard on the eyes.

What do you consider a better color scheme?

Light color text over dark background is better for your eyes than black text on white backgrounds. 

Technically, the ideal color scheme is bright green on black, which is why old computers had that specific color scheme before we had multicolor monitors. 

If it's hard on your eyes, what you probably need is turning up the zoom - 150% or 200% works best.  I don't read the forum without at least 150% zoom.