Print

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

[Rod]

Just wondering.. 
10%.... 5%.... 0.00001%?

Will it ever be finished?

[Reudh]

Toady has said it's his life's work, so it's likely not going to be finished for a very, very long time yet.

As it stands though, there's already enough content for a full game.

[Capntastic]

What percent finished is, say, Nethack?

[Dae]

It's around a third done. If I Recall Correctly, the version number was supposed to be the percentage of how done is DF. So that'd be 31% for last release and a little more for the upcoming one.
But it's a little dubious since the scope of the game gets slightly larger as time goes by. Not much of an importance when you consider how huge DF aims to be, but still.

But that's just until version 1. DF won't stop there. So I guess we should consider how much of DF is done by estimating the remaining lifespan of Toady.

[malvado]

Hmm, if the version number equals the % of game done, then I guess the next release might up it by a few percents actually ^_^

Although if I was to judge personally by what "I'd like to see in the game" then I'd say its around 10% ;-)

Edit : I'm thinking about stuff like a GUI , Audio (dwarves laughing, killing , sleeping etc etc) , multithreaded to just name a few of the technical ones besides the many things I hope he will include gameplay wise in the game as well (some of them evidently allready planned).

[NobodyPro]

Unlikely, the version number's been 31. ever since the massive rewrite and the second number goes up by one with every update no matter the content. Though Toady has hinted that a new version naming system might be used soon^{[Citation Needed]}.

[Rod]

Do you think its possible that Toady will actually ever finish it?  I don't think so.. at least not in terms of the vision he has.  Still though, its an amazing game to play already!

[erthel]

That is silly. What would he do with his life if he finished Dwarf Fortress?

If he arrives to the "I think this thing is done" moment, he will probably rethink it to "hell, I would add XXXX feature", and so forth.

[Stargrasper]

Hmm, if the version number equals the % of game done, then I guess the next release might up it by a few percents actually ^_^

Although if I was to judge personally by what "I'd like to see in the game" then I'd say its around 10% ;-)

Edit : I'm thinking about stuff like a GUI , Audio (dwarves laughing, killing , sleeping etc etc) , multithreaded to just name a few of the technical ones besides the many things I hope he will include gameplay wise in the game as well (some of them evidently allready planned).

I'm not sure this is the case anymore.  In the old number system (from the 40d era), this was true.  That's because, the first number after the initial 0 was the number of core components complete, of which there were 100.  That meant that the number of core component complete meant approximately the percentage completion of the hypothetical version 1.  With the v31 era, Toady changed the numbering system to drop a couple components and changed the dev roadmap to no longer use cores.  While the DF Wiki says that same number is the number of cores complete, Toady is either not using the cores anymore or at least not showing them to use directly.

Unlikely, the version number's been 31. ever since the massive rewrite and the second number goes up by one with every update no matter the content. Though Toady has hinted that a new version naming system might be used soon^{[Citation Needed]}.

What, he's changing it again?  Toady will do what he does with the versioning system.  I think the reason he hasn't updated the 31 is because he hasn't made any massive, world-breaking updates since then.

[mikelon]

With the potential i see in this game id say its around 20% done.

First on the list is a new code system that doesnt kill the fps when you reach over 100 dwarves especially when the king technically isnt supposed to show up till after 140 dwarves.

[Untelligent]

I think the reason he hasn't updated the 31 is because he hasn't made any massive, world-breaking updates since then.

 The first number doesn't really have anything to do with world-breaking updates; those are just coincidences. The last two times save compatibility was broken were the addition of the z-axis (from 0.23.130.23a to 0.27.169.32a) and the rather large DF2010 update (from 0.28.181.40d to 0.31.01) -- meaning that at some point, the first number went up without breaking save compatibility (27 to 28 -- the update was mostly worldgen stuff, if memory (and a brief skim through the devlog) serves, which is mostly harmless to gameplay and usually doesn't even cause the bugs that updates can do to older worlds, like the overflowing volcanoes from years back).
 
 Additionally, Toady added as many save-breaking features to 31.01 as he expected he could get away with (notably biting off more a bit more than he could chew and setting a record for time between releases; 2009 was the Year Without an Update), so that shouldn't happen again for a while. Well, ideally. I've heard this upcoming one might possibly do it again.
 

[Stargrasper]

I think the reason he hasn't updated the 31 is because he hasn't made any massive, world-breaking updates since then.

 The first number doesn't really have anything to do with world-breaking updates; those are just coincidences. The last two times save compatibility was broken were the addition of the z-axis (from 0.23.130.23a to 0.27.169.32a) and the rather large DF2010 update (from 0.28.181.40d to 0.31.01) -- meaning that at some point, the first number went up without breaking save compatibility (27 to 28 -- the update was mostly worldgen stuff, if memory (and a brief skim through the devlog) serves, which is mostly harmless to gameplay and usually doesn't even cause the bugs that updates can do to older worlds, like the overflowing volcanoes from years back).
 
 Additionally, Toady added as many save-breaking features to 31.01 as he expected he could get away with (notably biting off more a bit more than he could chew and setting a record for time between releases; 2009 was the Year Without an Update), so that shouldn't happen again for a while. Well, ideally. I've heard this upcoming one might possibly do it again.

I was guessing, mind.  Yes, I know that those numbers changing have to do with cores, major features, being added.  Do you happen to know if Toady is still using the cores for numbering?  All I know is that cores aren't published in an obvious place anymore.

[NonconsensualSurgery]

Obviously not even close. A computer that could run a 100% finished copy of Dwarf Fortress does not exist yet. It'll be done when it is a perfect quantum simulation of a fantasy universe and dwarves achieve sentience and murder ToadyOne.

[Putnam]

Toady said in one of the DFTalks that he currently has a list that isn't published on the internet that has what the version numbers should represent. I think they're still percentage points, but with more conjecture than the cores provided. I also remember him saying that the next version should be .33 or .34, and saying "Yay! 1/3 done with the game! Only 18 years left to go!"

Though Toady does like to say 20, supposedly

[Footkerchief]

Unlikely, the version number's been 31. ever since the massive rewrite and the second number goes up by one with every update no matter the content. Though Toady has hinted that a new version naming system might be used soon^{[Citation Needed]}.

Here's the quote I think you're referring to:

I have a big list that has the point value for a bunch of things, because it was like ... when we went to version 0.31 and then we started making all those changes and then we did all the stuff like the first night creatures for adventure mode, and the version number just kept going 31.18, 31.19, 31.20, and we never increased it because we had moved away from that core one hundred system and didn't really replace it with something else so the version number was stagnant for a while. But now I've written down a list of all the things for version 1 with I think about .02 or a little more - maybe .05 - worth of wiggle room for whatever we might want to throw in there, but basically the whole version number with night creatures ... I think night creatures are worth like .005 or something and they all have various degrees and so on. I didn't want to put it up because we've had bad luck with dev systems changing. It's really nothing new, it's just trying to systematize the version number so I can think about it.

But yeah, if we're at 0.33 or 0.34 that sounds about right for next time. And that's significant, because we'd be crossing a third of the way through after nine years, so we'd be able to say in 18 years I'm going to be 51 years old and we're going to be at Dwarf Fortress version 1. That'll be great. Then I'll retire or something ... or just start version 2. And various other projects and stuff, it's going to be great. So let's see here, yeah, so it's cool, there's all kinds of things going on.

I don't read that quote as saying that the current numbering scheme will go out the window, just that the number is no longer being calculated strictly by completed core features.  And the major version number will go up for this release.