Matters of computing power aside I thought of the single biggest reason Df can't ever have "modern" graphics. Or at least nothing better than sprites and isometric view.
If the game were to be rendered into full 3d "modern graphics" a problem of size of things becomes a big issue.
For example a dwarf digs a mine shaft that probably isn't much taller than the dwarf, how the fuck are you supposed to show a dragon or anything else large like that invading your tunnels?
You mean "single worst reason"?
There is no issue. Have you never seen a 3D game with models of different sizes? Actually the advantage of 3D is that you can scale things easily and still see everything in detail or as overview by only changing the viewport. With tiles you can't make a dwarf the proper size compared to a dragon, because it would only be one or two pixels on average sized tilesets.
And anyway, why is having a dwarf and a dragon the same size ok in 2D, but not ok in 3D?
And what are you implying by "Matters of computing power aside"? Please consider that a game like Dungeon Keeper (which i consider as a good start of what a DF3D could look like) is from 1997! Any current PC should be able to run simple 3D graphics good enough for DF. If you have a very old PC you might not be able to run the current DF anyway, because you will have 2fps on an 1x1 embark with 10 dwarfs.
Some general remarks:
- Does DF need 3D? No.
3D is not always better than 2D and a tile-based game like DF works perfectly fine with 2D.
- Would DF benefit from 3D? Yes.
Because the simulated world is 3D, using 3D graphics just feels naturally. But, because its not a shooter, you need mainly the overview. But this is not a problem with 3D at all. Even the multiple z-levels are no problem, just keep the z-level indicator and cut everything off over the current level.
A great possibility of 3D is that you could have an overview to manage things and seamlessly to a first person view. Just imagine looking at your fortress in 3D in game while the dwarfs are working.
- Is 3D harder to program than 2D? Yes.
Right now DF is pseudo ascii anyway and already uses accelerated graphics. Still 3D takes things to a new dimension, literally. I reckon that Toady is good at programming game logic, but he isn't a 3D programmer. This is actually the biggest reason against 3D. If you do it, do it right.
- Can the 2D mode be improved? Yes.
Like i said, Toady is not a 3D programmer. Well, i don't think he is a good graphics programmer at all (or UI programmer). The 2D mode is sufficient but leaves a lot to be desired. There could be colored meters/indicators for dwarf status (drink/food/health). Indicators on workshops could show cluttering or workload or that it's claimed by a moody dwarf. Stockpiles could show usage. Overlays could be added to see what areas indicate negative/positive thoughts.
Even though the game is mainly tile-based doesn't mean that everything has to stay this way. Using tiles for the interface is already a bad choice.
If Toady would eventually risk the step to improve the 2D graphics mode there would be endless possibilities to improve the game. But i guess that would mean that he has to find someone who can actually program a proper 2D engine and UI.
Author
Topic: a reason I thought of against "better" graphics (Read 6612 times)