Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dwarf Fortress: An actual look at graphical improvements

steamcommunity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 142 posts

Re: Dwarf Fortress: An actual look at graphical improvements

#41

Post by csours »

dmos62 wrote: post #36
zionic wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I completely disagree. The ASCII "graphics" (if you can really call them that) are a huge reason why I've never even considered playing it. I've read all about the mechanics, and they're interesting. I just don't understand why anyone would spend so much time developing so many intricate features when the presentation is so poor.

To me this is like saying you don't like books because they're black and white. With ASCII I've some textual description of what an object looks like (say, dwarf), but most of it is filled in by my imagination, and it does a much better job than any artist, and it's more dynamic, adapting to my mood and what I'm experiecing. Talk about high-tech. A tileset puts a great constraint on that. If there's a choice between…

In a book, I don't have to make the words do anything. Also, I've spent my whole life learning English vocabulary.

I could spend some more time learning the DF glyphs, but a picture is worth a thousand words.

I killed the Balrog in uMoria* back in the day, so I'm not a stranger to ASCII graphics. The difference between rogue-likes and DF is the extremely huge variability in the glyphs.

Edit: To continue the comparison to books, Dwarf Fortress is like an interactive textbook, Roguelikes compare to genre fiction.

*I'm a dirty save-scummer, but I still put in a bunch of time.

Re: Dwarf Fortress: An actual look at graphical improvements

#43

Post by macintux »

Supermancho wrote: post #17
jtolmar wrote: post #10

I never thought the ASCII graphics were a big problem in Dwarf Fortress; once you get used to it using a bunch of symbols as decoration, almost all the weird stuff ends up being things you placed yourself. On the other hand, the complete lack of UX consistency - whether a given submenu will use primary/secondary cursor keys, nested menus, or a pile of hotkeys - is a lot harder to deal with.

It's a lot like languages that refuse to change syntax (Erlang vs Elixir, both still not that great on syntax) because it's a luddite adherence to cultural experience or thinking. It shows a disregard for users and a self-imposed barrier to adoption. DF is horrid for usability. Just because I can screenshot notepad, print it out, and send mail on a turtle, does suffice to say I support an e-mail feature. Military squ…

Erlang has a very concise syntax that takes about a half hour to teach. “Not that great” is a very subjective observation.

Re: Dwarf Fortress: An actual look at graphical improvements

#44

Post by munk-a »

rstupek wrote: post #34
danso wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah that's the issue for me. I don't mind interpreting ASCII characters, but the UI/menu navigation feels intimidating. Rimworld will (I assume) never be the type of indepth simulation that DF is, but it spoiled me with its point-and-click GUI

I don't know if a point and click GUI precludes the depth of DF. If anything some things should be much easier to do with point and click. Factorio combines keyboard with point and click navigation and it has some depth to it.

I think good mouse support wouldn't remove the ability to navigate menus using keystrokes - but for tasks like drawing out farms, the dig squares for a residential block or dragging and dropping workshops into the right place... that's where I think it'll shine.

I don't dislike the keyboard approach used right now but DF hack and it's digging templates has clearly demonstrated that folks feel the lack of good dig designation sorely.

Re: Dwarf Fortress: An actual look at graphical improvements

#45

Post by cjhveal »

jtolmar wrote: post #10

I never thought the ASCII graphics were a big problem in Dwarf Fortress; once you get used to it using a bunch of symbols as decoration, almost all the weird stuff ends up being things you placed yourself. On the other hand, the complete lack of UX consistency - whether a given submenu will use primary/secondary cursor keys, nested menus, or a pile of hotkeys - is a lot harder to deal with.

I personally agree. A lot of those disagreeing with you find the ASCII graphics to be a barrier to initial entry, which is true, but it is a barrier that you can overcome quickly and feel quite comfortable with. On the other hand, having spent many hours with the game, the UX issues you mention are what block me from building fluid muscle memory and being able to really get into the game.

Re: Dwarf Fortress: An actual look at graphical improvements

#47

Post by rstupek »

The biggest single thing DF can do after graphical improvements is fixing the performance, perhaps make it not single threaded. I've been able to get past the graphics, and work through using the keyboard menus, but having the fortress come to a screeching crawl when there's a ton of things going on is when I stopped playing.

Re: Dwarf Fortress: An actual look at graphical improvements

#48

Post by Natsu »

zionic wrote: post #21
jtolmar wrote: post #10

I never thought the ASCII graphics were a big problem in Dwarf Fortress; once you get used to it using a bunch of symbols as decoration, almost all the weird stuff ends up being things you placed yourself. On the other hand, the complete lack of UX consistency - whether a given submenu will use primary/secondary cursor keys, nested menus, or a pile of hotkeys - is a lot harder to deal with.

I completely disagree. The ASCII "graphics" (if you can really call them that) are a huge reason why I've never even considered playing it. I've read all about the mechanics, and they're interesting. I just don't understand why anyone would spend so much time developing so many intricate features when the presentation is so poor.

The thing is, it's really not. Granted, I always used the Lazy Newbie Pack which gave you basic tiles, but once you get used to ASCII, things tend to be a lot easier. Also, this is a detailed simulation, so things move a lot faster if you're not spending CPU on graphics.

Remember, each creature has a bunch of parts with individual health, each tile can get stained by various materials (that can spread disease) and everything is made of various materials with all sorts of mostly-realistic properties. I mean, DF is the sole reason you can find the solid density of Saguaro rib wood on the internet and the value came from an empirical test of a small cube of Saguaro rib wood. It's in the DF raws.

So yeah, you might enjoy DF with a tile set like the LNP if you like the mechanics. But it's a super-complicated game so it takes a while to learn to control things, to learn the requirements to make various items, etc. It's not a game for everyone, you do have to sink quite a lot of time into learning it to enjoy it.

Re: Dwarf Fortress: An actual look at graphical improvements

#49

Post by gnulinux »

rstupek wrote: post #16
gnulinux wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Completely agree. ASCII graphics were completely fine, if not desirable. I loved playing DF but I also hated it at the same time because of the inconsistent UI. wasd vs. ijkl vs +- vs arrows vs ... almost nothing made sense to me until reading the manual. Granted, the game is fun enough that I always read the manual, but a good UI is intuitive UI. I hope this new effort fixes more than just graphics. I can't care les…

I agree that the graphics (with mods) were acceptable but the inconsistent UI made it more difficult than it needed to be. Some of the AI could use some tweaks as well. It definitely is a fun game (dropping lava on an orc/troll army and watching them run was awesome)

Never really advanced that much in the game to fight orcs. I just set up some good looking magma smelters, smelted whole bunch of jewels and sold them to caravan and elves and stuff. This was many years ago, I remember having a lot of fun, but also how excruciatingly tedious everything was. I remember setting dwarf tasks (allow/disallow) required a lot of micromanaging and DwarfTherapist didn't work well in linux. Regardless, amazing game, I hope devs solve the UX issue. I'd probably buy the game the day it's released.

Re: Dwarf Fortress: An actual look at graphical improvements

#50

Post by rstupek »

gnulinux wrote: post #49
rstupek wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that the graphics (with mods) were acceptable but the inconsistent UI made it more difficult than it needed to be. Some of the AI could use some tweaks as well. It definitely is a fun game (dropping lava on an orc/troll army and watching them run was awesome)

Never really advanced that much in the game to fight orcs. I just set up some good looking magma smelters, smelted whole bunch of jewels and sold them to caravan and elves and stuff. This was many years ago, I remember having a lot of fun, but also how excruciatingly tedious everything was. I remember setting dwarf tasks (allow/disallow) required a lot of micromanaging and DwarfTherapist didn't work well in linux. Re…

Perhaps you put your fortress down in a place with no enemies... most games I would have to immediately setup a system to keep enemies out or they'd massacre everyone pretty quickly! Once I had a dragon come and lay waste to everything, burning down all of the trees outside and setting fire to all the hapless dwarves.
Post reply on HN