quote:
Originally posted by Toady One:
<STRONG>There's only so much you can do in-game right now, so I won't be surprised if people start getting fatigued, like they do with any game, but if word continues to circulate around at least potential players will know where to go when they want to check back for an update, since we'll still be here.</STRONG>
Prioritize!
- Specialized stockpiles
- Prioritize jobs
- Better hunter AI
- Combat log
- Fire
- A way to refuse immigrants you don't want
Oh, I know you absolutely hate people that tell you what to do :)
My opinion is that you are getting attention because you created a truly unique, addicting game with a lot of depth. If this game was just about the more classic rogue-like experience (the adventure mode) I don't think many of us would have known about it. So it's not where I think the "worth" is. It is surely an interesting addition, but not the one that was *decisive* for its relative success.
The "legendary item" you crafted (after being possessed by a fey spirit and risked going mad) is "dwarf fortress".
As a player, I keep refreshing the dev page every day and different times a day. Honestly I'm not much interested about what you add to the adventure game because that's not something that adds depth to the game I love and that I want to follow and see growing. While I dig every detail that goes to affect the "dwarf fortress" mode. And I also have to say that I'm not even so thrilled knowing you are going to work on a human and kobold or goblin city-building mode similar to the dwarf one but that at the end will divert the attentionfrom the dwarf fortress. It's a shift of focus (adds variation, but not depth).
If you add "depth" people will stay addicted. If you add "polish" new players more likely will stick with the game.
If instead you add or expand alternative modes you don't add an incremental value and disperse what makes this game great. At least if what you add doesn't go to influence and intersect with the other modes (which is always great).
There was recently a speech from Rob Pardo (working on World of Warcraft) where he talks about "concentrated coolness". It's off-topic here, but it's basically what I'm saying.
So I know you hate this kind of pressure and that you'll decide what you want, and that's great. But I also think that you now have a "fandom" now that is waiting for more :)
You have so much planned for this game that it's a shame to see it moved too far in the future. Considering your programming time as a limited resource you should understand in which direction I'm tugging your sleeve.
My wish as a player is that you specialize and work more on the "dwarf fortress" mode, because it has a huge potential still to deliver. The more you polish and add depth, the more the value of this game increases. I also think that it's that part that got you the attention (unique gameplay, personalized building style, "graphic" game without much text to really "read", possibility to export maps to share/show with friends, incredible depth and design consistence and so on..)
It's great EXACTLY because it doesn't feel like a rogue-like.
While working on the sidetracks (adventure mode, other city-building modes, etc..) surely adds breadth to the game world, but doesn't directly add to the value that made this game draw so much attention.
The only thing I can add about priorization is this: Do what gives the most improvement for the least amount of work first.
Also, fixed that for you VV
quote:
Originally posted by Abalieno:
<STRONG>
The "legendary item" you crafted (after being possessed by a fey spirit and going stark raving mad in the process) is "dwarf fortress".</STRONG>
However, I agree with your main push, which is:
-I find DF the most fun part of the game and
-I hope Toady does more soon and
-Yay, Toady.
I wish people would say what they want without making it like "the other crap you do is worthless, why aren't you doing what I want."
quote:
Originally posted by dav:
<STRONG>I think it's weird to talk about value in a free game. (...) </STRONG>
Do things need to have a cost to get value ?
[ September 14, 2006: Message edited by: flap ]
quote:
Originally posted by dav:
<STRONG>I wish people would say what they want without making it like "the other crap you do is worthless, why aren't you doing what I want."</STRONG>
But when you have limited resources you ought to make choices. I'm just saying that focusing would be better welcomed than diverting the attention to other parts.
Creating a "human" or "goblin" mode to mirror the "dwarf fortress" one would take a lot of time if you aim for the same depth. At the same time these would be variations on a theme, that do not really add to the depth or polish of one. This is why I wrote about "incremental value".
You can add a number of sidetracks, and I'm absolutely sure that they would be very cool, but they would still require a lot of time, while taking away from all that is planned for the "main" game.
What we love as player? Be honest. New features, new objects, new professions, new specializations, new units, bugfixing and so on. New gameplay occasions, better control, more depth and polish.
I wish "dwarf fortress" would still get the priority, while the rest continues to move on, but without shifting the main focus. I think the rest of the game could grow around "dwarf fortress", instead of replacing it.
[ September 14, 2006: Message edited by: Abalieno ]
[ September 14, 2006: Message edited by: Fenek ]
Keep up the great work, Toady. I'm sure you're on the right track.
quote:
Originally posted by dav:
<STRONG>No, of course not, but "incremental value"? It just sounds like cost-benefit-analysis to me, except that the cost is Toady's (unless you're donating). It just sounded weird. I guess too many threads of "is FFXXIIF worth it??!!??" have gotten to my brain.</STRONG>
Its a free game, but a) toady is still asking for donations, and b) ones time is not worthless.
So increasing the value of the game might help toady get more donations and will playing the game a more rewarding waste of valuable time.
(in that line, a time compression, or "run as fast as the cpu allows" mode would be nice. I mean if i want to micromanage i can still pause, but after work i hesitate starting DF because there may be an hour downtime till its spring again or something.
There's also an issue of not just how much depth there is but also how wide the gameplay is. Making dwarf mode deeper is cool but that means it takes more time for players to get into it that deep. Making other modes means any player can drop right in and play those new things. If you just lost your fortress to demons, instead of playing through reclaim/rebuilding a new fortress from scratch to get to that point again, you can just start playing a goblin fortress and get a fresh experience right from the start. That's not necessarily true if you just keep adding things to dwarf mode to make it stay interesting for longer.
quote:
Making dwarf mode deeper is cool but that means it takes more time for players to get into it that deep.
Most of the features planned don't add "depth" in the sense that they came late in the game.
Something like prioritizing jobs, specialized stockpiles, rewalling, fire and so on. These are all features that you would play with right away.
Seriously, how about we just forget the "pressure" thing and just let him code whatever he feels like coding.
Not one portion of the game is a dissapointment, so it's rather hard to argue with his development methods and goals.
quote:
Originally posted by phorteetoo:
<STRONG>Why you gotta be tryin' to mess with his mojo?
</STRONG>
This man has both the proper idea AND the proper phrasing.
Toady knows what's best. Occasionally a stray idea will tickle his fancy, and of course he'll handle any bugs as fast as wizard lightning. But trying to pressure him is like trying to cage a songbird. It's mean :(
quote:
Originally posted by lachek:
<STRONG>I <3 World Building</STRONG>
Nethack and other Roguelikes offer another dungeon, or another "level". Dwarf Fortress offers entirely unique worlds, with what feels like living creatures, despite them being nothing but ascii representations.
Nethack offers moments where you're saying to yourself "Why am I fighting this leocrotta on level seven of this dungeon after 15,000 moves for the fifth time? Sure, it's a new level in that I've never seen it before, but it's still permeated by similarity." In Dwarf Fortress, you know why you're being attacked by lions and alligators in the middle of nowhere. You know why goblins are aerating your skull with a crossbow when you "visit" one of their fortresses.
You can make a so-called "base" in Nethack, but after you ascend with that character, the amount of time you put into it will be lost forever. In Dwarf Fortress, even if you succeed entirely, and eventually abandon your fortress, it's a permanent fixture of the terrain for the rest of time. Not only that, the effort you put into making legendary artifacts and weaponry will still not be wasted, as an adventurer can swing by and heft that blessed bucket of tin with bands of tin that has menacing spikes of tin.
I like the subtle interaction between World-Building, Adventure mode and Fortress mode, and that's the reason I play this game. The ability to create an entire world's history at nearly the click of a button is nothing to be sneered at.
But for now, it's fortress mode all the way, with adventure mode for a break, or for the fun of coming back to a failed fortress.
What tantalises me the most is the possibility for interaction between the two modes, so that they enhance and deepen each other. I love the idea of being able to visit a huge AI driven fortress, in adventure mode, with hundreds of dwarves going about their daily lives, digging, hunting, sleeping and drinking. Or the possibility to explore my own fortress on an intimate level.
I'm not sure I agree entirely about the distinction between width and depth. I think sometimes by adding to one you also add to the other (as highlighted by the possible interaction mentioned above). If we ever get human, elven, or goblin towns, they could very well add to the depth of the dwarf game, by providing more complex and concrete opponents to interact with (be it peacefully, or not).
That said I do think dwarfs should be expanded first (in line with the original development plans), but there will come a time when more will be added to the game (for less work), by adding the variety of other civilizations. And by then you might even be sick of dwarfs :)
Soon I think I'm going to get to the point where I get burned out and need to either put the game away for awhile or start looking into the other modes, though a little more randomness and depth to keep me on my toes in the DF part would go a long way to keep me coming back.
Actually, I made a pact with myself: I will stop playing until three new versions have been put out, at which point I'll take it back up again. It should take about 10 days at the current rate.