Print

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

[Corona688]

Things like the mayday mod are getting farther and farther from the vanilla game, to the point that when I send DFers screenshots from my more vanilla game they can't recognize a thing.  Might it be time to start enabling things like graphical creatures in the vanilla download by default?  Sparingly, not a complete makeover like mayday's mod.  Just creatures, and maybe smooth walls.  I'm sure plenty of tileset makers etc would be tickled pink to be asked if they want their graphics in the vanilla game.

[Catastrophic lolcats]

I'm not really sure what you're suggesting here.

Graphics set to be included in default Dwarf Fortress? Not really seeing the point of that. We've already got the lazy noob pack for people who are new to the game and/or don't want to try the default settings.

Are you saying the graphical packs should replace the old default one? Whats the point in that? Some people (like myself) prefer the default ascii graphics over the packs.

Personally I find it hard to see whats going on in screenshots from graphic packs so adding it as an option isn't going to automatically mean the two groups will merge.

Ontop of that it's very easy to mod your game to have default tilesets but have graphical creatures.

[Capntastic]

If a graphical tileset became default, then Toady would either have to make hone himself, or pick one from the many many out there to be 'official', neither of which are really something I can see him doing.

[Corona688]

I'm not really sure what you're suggesting here.

An included creature graphic set of some sort, or at least an improved tile set.  Arguably the current tileset belongs to IBM anyway.

Not really seeing the point of that.

So the vanilla game will at least have some distant resemblance to the noob pack and the like.

Personally I find it hard to see whats going on in screenshots from graphic packs so adding it as an option isn't going to automatically mean the two groups will merge.

It's already an option.  It just comes broken/incomplete right now.

Ontop of that it's very easy to mod your game to have default tilesets but have graphical creatures.

Easy for some.

[Mckee]

Unless you update the entire game, creatures and walls will look terribly out of place if they are the only ones to get a none Asci tileset.

People either like or dislike the default graphics. Smashing a tile set in for only a small part of the displayed content will not fix that.
As others have said, Toady would have to pick a tileset or make his own, and I don't see why he would suddenly change his conciously chosen theme of using asci graphics because a few people cant change their graphic set or learn to like the original.

[Urist McCheeseMaker]

Not really seeing the point of that.

So the vanilla game will at least have some distant resemblance to the noob pack and the like.

It would bring down the wrath of those who like to play without the confusing graphics packs. DF getting closer to resembling the noob pack is a bad thing. Let us have our ASCII and we'll let you have your noob pack.

[blizzerd]

i think some very "basic" tileset enabled at standard is something that could help this game

not because people cant seem to be bothered with adding it in themselves (lazy newb pack) but because when you look at screenshots of this game, its hard to recognise anything sometimes if you play with/without tileset and it will create a kind of cooherence

[Starver]

Laying my cards on the table, I'm a habitual default ANSI-like user, and never ever used any LNP (although I have tried manually applied graphics, and reverted because it didn't add anything).

That said, I still think I can justify the fact that given the completely different styles of graphics packs available, the common denominator to all players (LNPers, aside) is the default ANSI-like set.

So... Does the LNP have a single graphics pack?  Is it applied by default?  If it does, and it is, then for the proportion of players who use LNP would roughly determine the proportion of players for whom the ANSI is less decypherable and who would benefit from the LNP "standard" becoming the DF standard.  But then I'd want something (in default DF distribution, not in the LNP which must already have this as a side-utility) simple to allow switching between at will, if not a "first use".  And I say that knowing that new players would likely go for the "ooh shiny" option over the "developer's cut" one, no matter what alternate wording is used.  But I know I'd stick with what I know.

[Bohandas]

The biggest problem with graphics packs is the same as their strength. They are less bstrat, and while this may be helpful when encountering the most common object to be epresented by a given character, it also makes it both misleading and jarring to see any other object which may be represented by the same character. I prefer the default graphics (they make me feel like I'm Tank or Dozer from the Matrix movies). Although I would not be opposed to alternate graphics packs being included with the game provided that they were not turned on by default.

[Bohandas]

The biggest problem with graphics packs is the same as their strength. They are less bstrat, and while this may be helpful when encountering the most common object to be epresented by a given character, it also makes it both misleading and jarring to see any other object which may be represented by the same character. I prefer the default graphics (they make me feel like I'm Tank or Dozer from the Matrix movies). Although I would not be opposed to alternate graphics packs being included with the game provided that they were not turned on by default.

Oh wait, I just realized that the OP was mainly talking about creature graphics sets (as opposed to alternate tilesets). I guess I'd be ok with that, but the actual graphics for other creatures should be of a minimalist nature, in the manner of the tiles that represent dwarves in the default tileset (a simple drawing of a bearded face).

[Catastrophic lolcats]

The problem with creature graphics sets are the very small amount of space each tile allows for the art.

Even at 16x16 the creatures can be fairly hard to try and compare to each other.
This is not to mention that the dafault Curses tile set is 9x12 pixels, it would be impossible to even attempt to include all the creatures in DF.

Another point is theres so many made up creatures in Dwarf Fortress. Would of a small 16x16 picture of a Nightwing mean anything to a player than a gray N?
What about randomly generated creatures like Forgotten Beasts? Do they all have to have their own art?

Between the graphics sets and the various programs that can translate the game to isometric or full 3D I don't see how anyone can complain about the graphics anymore.
There's a little work to be done to give custom graphics full support but it's hardly game changing.

Edit: It's also very easy to do mod in the basic tileset with full creature graphics.
Go to the wiki, find a set you like, download it, dump it in the dwarf fortress file, change the init file to TRUE on graphic sets, Done..
Seriously if that's too hard then you have more problems then graphics.

[Cespinarve]

Things like the mayday mod are getting farther and farther from the vanilla game, to the point that when I send DFers screenshots from my more vanilla game they can't recognize a thing.  Might it be time to start enabling things like graphical creatures in the vanilla download by default?  Sparingly, not a complete makeover like mayday's mod.  Just creatures, and maybe smooth walls.  I'm sure plenty of tileset makers etc would be tickled pink to be asked if they want their graphics in the vanilla game.

No. Hell I love MAyday and I think this idea is unworkable. If they don't recognize vanilla screenshots than that's the break- I've learned to live with nonsensical ASCII screenshots.

[Draco18s]

No. Hell I love MAyday and I think this idea is unworkable. If they don't recognize vanilla screenshots than that's the break- I've learned to live with nonsensical ASCII screenshots.

Mayday's graphics are nice, but I agree.  I can only stand playing the game in ASCII (or ANSI, or whatever we want to call it) and I've learned to deal with everyone else posting graphical pack screenshots and not knowing wtf I'm supposed to be looking at.

(Them: "Look at the kobolds!  Look at the kobolds!  Isn't that awesome!?"
Me: "What kobolds where?  You're using a non-standard graphical pack, therefore I don't magically know what a kobold looks like with your custom tileset")

[GreatWyrmGold]

I like ACSII, so I disagree strongly.

[Stromko]

Any tweaks that are purely graphical don't need to happen until DF approaches release. If Toady had to handle graphics, he'd have to worry about whether or not to add graphics every time he adds a new creature to the base game. That's something for the community to worry about, I personally don't like the idea of Toady having to worry about graphics at all right now.

What it comes down to is: what would this add to the game? What would this add to the game that the community isn't already servicing?

Anyone who seriously wants to play Dwarf Fortress is going to look at the forums or the wiki, and they're going to know about graphical tilesets. They can then choose a tileset that suits them, if they want that. There is no reason to add to the download size and give them a tileset that they might not use, either in favor of the default or a different tileset.

Lastly, having an official tileset would dampen enthusiasm for any other commnunity-made tilesets. It wouldn't be very fair to the many different groups making tilesets.