Bay 12 Games Forum

Dwarf Fortress => DF General Discussion => Topic started by: Drathnoxis on January 09, 2016, 02:02:36 am

Title: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Drathnoxis on January 09, 2016, 02:02:36 am

I created a small world with 7 civs and 150 years to try to cut back on how much was going on, but still I have 8.5k historical figures and 400 different groups and sites and about 200 artifacts made by necromancers and it's just way, way, way too much to even read a fraction of let alone remember or comprehend

Like I want to get invested in my world, but when the human liaison comes and gives me news of the world that consists of pages and pages of text -- that mainly seem to consist of some place being conquered and dozens and dozens of refugees naming themselves something like the undulating sponges -- my eyes just glaze over and I skip it after reading a couple lines.

And then all my dwarves have their own likes and dislikes and relations and dreams and everything, but I've got like 150 of the little buggers, I can't even remember their names let alone that Bomrek Eribbasen is married to Deler Othdukingish has 3 kids, a bunch of various family members, is BFFs with Athel Eliseshtan, Almost never feels discouraged, prefers that everyone live as harmoniously as possible, has a tendency to go it alone disregarding the advice of others, is somewhat fearful in the face of imminent danger, is pleased by her own appearance and talents, is not particularly interested in what others think of them, is a perfectionist, tends to be swayed by the emotions of others, only rarely tries to assert themselves in conversation, respects perseverance, is put off by merrymaking, sees competition as reasonably important, dreams of raising a family, likes sheep wool, desert tortoise shell, rock crystal, trifle pewter, chalk, lions, chickens, cabinets, bucklers and the shape of gizzard stones, prefers to consume bumblebee honey, bayberry wine, hake and demon rat, hates bat, is the member of a bunch of groups and worships Gigin and Logem Athser.

It's all just random interchangeable gibberish and it's spurting out of every orifice of the game.

I think it's interesting to have a bit of randomly generated detail to give individual character, but the game crossed the line between interesting and completely and utterly overwhelming about 50 miles ago. I really think less is more in this situation. If every dwarf only had 1 or 2 likes and personality traits it would make them stand out a lot more than having a wall of text. I might be able to follow the events of the world if every group of random vagrants didn't give themselves a stupid name and think their trudge across the desert of loathing was as important as the fact that the capitol city of my dwarves was just conquered by the elves. Why do we even so many group names anyway? There's the civilization name, the group name, and the site name. Couldn't we just ditch the middle one so instead of the Living Tombs from the Handle of Zeal founding Bootproblems, it's just the Handle of Zeal founds Bootproblems? Why do they need to be an independent group as well as part of a civilization?

Does anybody actually read all this stuff and not find it completely repetitive and overwhelming?

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Nunzillor on January 09, 2016, 02:47:43 am

I think I understand where you're coming from.  But a lot of that detail is great for emergent gameplay and storytelling, which is what I like best about DF.  A lot of the time the details don't come together into a notable or interesting whole, or there's just too much to analyze, but when everything aligns just right... it's awesome.

Stuff like Legends Viewer helps make sense of things.   Sometimes I'll do Legends Mode exports and have those ready and searchable in the viewer so that I can understand details better while playing Fortress Mode, that might help you with some of that.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Urlance Woolsbane on January 09, 2016, 02:54:28 am

I understand that it's overwhelming, but believe me, after a while, you'll adjust and start thinking "why isn't this more detailed?" :P

There's no need to look at every last detail of every last dwarf. I certainly don't. But if you want the information, it's there, which I think is important.

I too have a gripe, albeit minor, with the names in DF. I don't mind that so many exist, but they lack meaning. Sure, they can be assigned by spheres, but this just leads to the equivalent of calling a human "John the Hairless Biped of Sapience." Regional names can make sense (e.g. "the Fiery Island" for a volcanic isle,") but more often than not tend to be nonsensical, generic things like "the Desert of Boredom."

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: davsim on January 09, 2016, 04:12:30 am

I feel the same op, you can read the reports/descriptions so many times before it becomes totally boring.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Zarathustra30 on January 09, 2016, 04:14:50 am

You have encountered "Gray Goo", a common problem in Dwarf Fortress.  "Gray Goo" occurs when procedural generation outstrips interest. There so much to care about that you stop caring.

Dwarf Fortress has deep gameplay, and it will keep getting deeper. This should not be resisted; in fact, it is why many people play the game. Instead, attack the other front. Interest cannot be meaningfully increased, but it can be used more effectively.

• Don't display too much information at any one time. Keep the player focused on only a few things, and only when specifically asked for. The new (l)ocations screen is a good example. It is sparse and provides good information with little fluff.
• Provide relevant information in an easily accessible, but non-intrusive place. The player should not feel obligated to remember more than he or she needs to. This is where (l)ocations fails. When assigning occupations, skills and preferences should be available for each of the citizens when specifically requested.
• Context is key! Whenever you provide information, say why the player should care. Don't just say "X killed Y", say "X, a scoundrel from Komutesdor killed his king, Y!" By reusing the player's interest, you can stretch the interest far further.
• Make sure the player actually remembers what he or she has learned. Which is easier to remember: Komutesdor or PoemSells? Sounds are harder to remember than words. If there is no easy translation, use a description, but make sure the player remembers it.

Detail is not the problem. Lack of interest is. The real world is far deeper than any videogame, but humans still function. There is enough interest available, it just has to be used right.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Salmeuk on January 09, 2016, 05:06:29 am

pick and choose what you use. Don't play large population fortresses if it's overwhelming, and slow down your pace of play until you can manage what you encounter. I certainly don't read eveything about every dwarf - rather, I scan for interesting or standout combinations of interests or skills or goals or whatever. Each dwarf can be described like the main character in a fantasy novel, if you sit down and spend some time imagining their place in the world. Ask yourself why these things have come to pass, why these dwarves are motivated to immigrate, why the gods created this plane, why these werecreatures attacked. . .

Grey goo is a real thing, but as you become more familiar with the z page you can really start to appreciate the subtleties painted by those multicolored text walls.

Try a hermit challenge, too. Choose your fav from the starting seven and murder the rest, then open a hole-in-the-wall tavern in the middle of the desert. DO IT NOW

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Vattic on January 09, 2016, 01:56:48 pm

The main issue I have with all the detail is in presentation; The overly verbose attack reports and personality screen being prime examples.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Drathnoxis on January 09, 2016, 02:46:33 pm

Quote from: Salmeuk on January 09, 2016, 05:06:29 am

Each dwarf can be described like the main character in a fantasy novel, if you sit down and spend some time imagining their place in the world.

This is true, but there is a reason that fantasy novels don't usually have 50+ main characters, it's just too much. You usually have a couple main characters and then a bunch of side characters, and the side characters just have a couple aspects to their personality. Fred and George Weasley stand out more because they are primarily jokesters, rather than having a personality as fleshed out as Harry Potter.

I think if each dwarf was treated as a side character it would be more effective. Say if Bomrek Eribbasan from above, instead having the personality of a wall of text, the same as any dwarf, was put off by merrymaking is pleased by her own appearance and talents, likes lions, and prefers to consume hake and demon rat. This personality is a lot more distinct than before when she was kind of nice, kind of egotistical, kind of determined, kind of cowardly, etc.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: thvaz on January 09, 2016, 04:56:58 pm

You don't have to know every dwarf in your fortress, but if you want to know more about a specific one, the info is there. The same goes for all the historical figures around de world, you don't have to meet everyone of them as a adventurer, or even ever.

But you are complaining about the root of what makes Dwarf Fortress, well, Dwarf Fortress. without the overly ridiculous amount of detail Dwarf Fortress could well be called Gnomoria, or Banished, or any of the "streamlined" DF-likes.

However, I agree that the presentation has a lot to be improved.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: funkydwarf on January 09, 2016, 05:33:26 pm

Why do you feel like you should read and remember all that? The society simulation part of the game i.e. fortress mode, is totally playable without having to ever specifically respond to any of those details, with the exception maybe trying to save a depressed dwarf here or there by reading for his favorite material or food.

In other words, you are not required to read or "remember" any of it. But, if you need to unravel a mystery, such as whos a vamp, or why certain situations happen, then the info is there.  Then the game becomes a detective game and there is info to sort through to make it a challenge.

I enjoy fortress mode quite a bit.  I never read much of it, don't react to much of it, but LOVE that its there.


TLDR: If df is TLDR it doesn't matter, you don't need to know it all anyhow.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Neonivek on January 09, 2016, 05:45:11 pm

To me the "too much detail" has more to do with presentation and organization then with there being too much detail.

For example I want to look through legends for necromantic books or other secret books... But I have to look through the books about butterflies to find it. I don't mind there being a list of every single book in existence... but I care about being able to find special or important books.

I want to find out if someone is good for adventuring... but I have to read a paragraph in order to do so. I do care about their full on personality and physical makeup... but right now my time is precious.

There is a reason why a lot of long timers want the game to be MORE complex and it is because they already defeated the hurdle. Yet if people didn't HAVE to defeat that hurdle and could just enjoy it... it would be perfect.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: PrimusRibbus on January 09, 2016, 05:47:50 pm

Quote from: Zarathustra30 on January 09, 2016, 04:14:50 am

You have encountered "Gray Goo", a common problem in Dwarf Fortress.  "Gray Goo" occurs when procedural generation outstrips interest. There so much to care about that you stop caring.

Dwarf Fortress has deep gameplay, and it will keep getting deeper. This should not be resisted; in fact, it is why many people play the game. Instead, attack the other front. Interest cannot be meaningfully increased, but it can be used more effectively.

• Don't display too much information at any one time. Keep the player focused on only a few things, and only when specifically asked for. The new (l)ocations screen is a good example. It is sparse and provides good information with little fluff.
• Provide relevant information in an easily accessible, but non-intrusive place. The player should not feel obligated to remember more than he or she needs to. This is where (l)ocations fails. When assigning occupations, skills and preferences should be available for each of the citizens when specifically requested.
• Context is key! Whenever you provide information, say why the player should care. Don't just say "X killed Y", say "X, a scoundrel from Komutesdor killed his king, Y!" By reusing the player's interest, you can stretch the interest far further.
• Make sure the player actually remembers what he or she has learned. Which is easier to remember: Komutesdor or PoemSells? Sounds are harder to remember than words. If there is no easy translation, use a description, but make sure the player remembers it.

Detail is not the problem. Lack of interest is. The real world is far deeper than any videogame, but humans still function. There is enough interest available, it just has to be used right.

Very, very good post. Procedural generation is fantastic at making big, detailed, unique worlds on the fly. Unfortunately, it's incredibly bad at sorting out relevant and interesting stuff from the chaff, or highlighting things that are meaningful. It's not just an issue with Dwarf Fortress, you can see this phenomena in Elite: Dangerous, Cataclysm: DDA, and many roguelikes.

Frankly, DF's UI really does not help the situation. When you're already fighting procedural generation's tendency to drown interesting stuff in minutiae, choosing to display things like Dwarf personalities and feelings as giant single paragraphs does not do any favors.

My honest advice to OP is to not get invested in your world. DF's procedural generation is a tool to give you a fleshed out, new canvas every time you start a new world; not to give you a coherent world that you can get invested in. It makes for fun new challenges and extends the novelty of the game, but any attachment to the world is going to be through your own story that you're telling at your fort or with your adventurer.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: FantasticDorf on January 09, 2016, 06:56:31 pm

A giant fluffy swamp rabbit titan with spit attacks and two fluffy bun tails killed my local goblin demon-lord swatting him like a fly in the first few 5 and only years of generation setting back the goblins a fair bit (destroyed the dark tower to the ground killing all the residents) making them elect a regular goblin leader (unfortunately it did not change their stances to other civs i do not think since most of that is hard-coded anyway)

10/10 storytelling, amusing stuff like that keeps me to the game.

If you want less things to happen in the world or to be centric to your personal activities, i recommend downsizing the number of civilizations and widening the site embarks so that civs are further apart and less likely to engage all the time, as to the scaling of difficulty due to megabeasts, thats up to you, a empty world has little to talk about on the flipside and topics will be repeated by scholars and engravers. 

I empathize with your stance on the 'grey goo' I get bored too and only read it when something entertaining or of significance happens, such is the price of detail.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Trapezohedron on January 09, 2016, 08:14:16 pm

I personally just like to see how it strings adjectives from modded RAW files into the game, so I personally have defeated that hurdle. And IIRC, if you start typing up a name in Legends mode, you can streamline your search into something specific.

Dwarf Fortress has always been one part game and one part overly verbose generic fantasy world generator.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Niddhoger on January 10, 2016, 02:37:08 pm

I just think there needs to be better naming schemes.  Refugees can have one set of names different from performing troupes, and both of those are different from colony-founding groups and city governments.  Either use different word banks "Rags of Despair," or simply call them "The refugees of X"  A founding group can be "Civilization name _ Founders _ Insert random shit here"

As you mentioned, hearing that the Wet Socks of the Ragining Llamas founded the Anvil of Wobbling, but then the Tears of Sacking from the Undulating Punch of the Limp Knife conquered it and set up a new government called the "Sticks of Sticking" is just word-soup gibberish. None of these names have context behind them.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Salmeuk on January 10, 2016, 03:40:38 pm

Quote from: Niddhoger on January 10, 2016, 02:37:08 pm

I just think there needs to be better naming schemes.  Refugees can have one set of names different from performing troupes, and both of those are different from colony-founding groups and city governments.  Either use different word banks "Rags of Despair," or simply call them "The refugees of X"  A founding group can be "Civilization name _ Founders _ Insert random shit here"

As you mentioned, hearing that the Wet Socks of the Ragining Llamas founded the Anvil of Wobbling, but then the Tears of Sacking from the Undulating Punch of the Limp Knife conquered it and set up a new government called the "Sticks of Sticking" is just word-soup gibberish. None of these names have context behind them.

I tend to imagine that the dwarven language has various colloquialisms that translate poorly to English. I enjoy making up the reasons for silly names, like "The Anvil of Wobbling was a fortress named for it's tumultuous early leadership," or "The Tears of Sacking was a band of particularly evil goblins who enjoyed the thrill of pillaging and seeing their victims cry." I agree we could use some sort of symbol before or after each kind of name to denote what exactly it is, since the syntax isn't quite as clear as it could be (though if you struggle through it your example is entirely decipherable).

Frankly, if you're ever delved into the etymology of place-names (especially those in foreign languages) you discover just how crude and arbitrary names can be. Check this out and tell me it doesn't read like a joke at first: http://www.omnimap.com/cgi/graphic.pl?images/for-road/67-1081Wd.jpg

That's from a world map of "original" place names translated into English. See what I mean?

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Bumber on January 10, 2016, 03:52:27 pm

Quote from: Salmeuk on January 10, 2016, 03:40:38 pm

Frankly, if you're ever delved into the etymology of place-names (especially those in foreign languages) you discover just how crude and arbitrary names can be. Check this out and tell me it doesn't read like a joke at first: http://www.omnimap.com/cgi/graphic.pl?images/for-road/67-1081Wd.jpg

That's from a world map of "original" place names translated into English. See what I mean?

Stink Onion
I Don't Understand You!

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Urist_McArathos on January 10, 2016, 05:37:58 pm

Quote from: Salmeuk on January 10, 2016, 03:40:38 pm

Quote from: Niddhoger on January 10, 2016, 02:37:08 pm

I just think there needs to be better naming schemes.  Refugees can have one set of names different from performing troupes, and both of those are different from colony-founding groups and city governments.  Either use different word banks "Rags of Despair," or simply call them "The refugees of X"  A founding group can be "Civilization name _ Founders _ Insert random shit here"

As you mentioned, hearing that the Wet Socks of the Ragining Llamas founded the Anvil of Wobbling, but then the Tears of Sacking from the Undulating Punch of the Limp Knife conquered it and set up a new government called the "Sticks of Sticking" is just word-soup gibberish. None of these names have context behind them.

I tend to imagine that the dwarven language has various colloquialisms that translate poorly to English. I enjoy making up the reasons for silly names, like "The Anvil of Wobbling was a fortress named for it's tumultuous early leadership," or "The Tears of Sacking was a band of particularly evil goblins who enjoyed the thrill of pillaging and seeing their victims cry." I agree we could use some sort of symbol before or after each kind of name to denote what exactly it is, since the syntax isn't quite as clear as it could be (though if you struggle through it your example is entirely decipherable).

Frankly, if you're ever delved into the etymology of place-names (especially those in foreign languages) you discover just how crude and arbitrary names can be. Check this out and tell me it doesn't read like a joke at first: http://www.omnimap.com/cgi/graphic.pl?images/for-road/67-1081Wd.jpg

That's from a world map of "original" place names translated into English. See what I mean?

This makes a good point; that map makes North America look like a hack fantasy world. 

"We set sail from Heart's Farm, across Moon Navel Gulf.  We landed in the Place of Water Dogs, before beginning our arduous journey west to Stonewater...."

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Vattic on January 10, 2016, 07:29:54 pm

For more of the same you also have the Atlas of True Names (http://www.kalimedia.com/Atlas_of_True_Names.html). Then you also have all the rivers in the world that are called river in some local language or dialect.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Niddhoger on January 10, 2016, 08:45:54 pm

Oh yeah... The famous "Ponte Vechio" in Florence simply means "old bridge" in Italian. "Des Moines" is simply "the mounds" in French. My point was just to add more plain signifier words, as there is clearly no naming scheme. Baring that, a word bank for each group (performers, refuges, founders, war-parties) could be added. Personally, we can keep the weird names for countries and places, but be more direct with personal groups. The Spoony Bards from Anvil Storm arrived in Grave Spittle, it then the Rage of Artum from the Perils of Blood invaded. It's a little easier to keep track of.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: LMeire on January 10, 2016, 08:50:56 pm

Quote from: Salmeuk on January 10, 2016, 03:40:38 pm

Quote from: Niddhoger on January 10, 2016, 02:37:08 pm

I just think there needs to be better naming schemes.  Refugees can have one set of names different from performing troupes, and both of those are different from colony-founding groups and city governments.  Either use different word banks "Rags of Despair," or simply call them "The refugees of X"  A founding group can be "Civilization name _ Founders _ Insert random shit here"

As you mentioned, hearing that the Wet Socks of the Ragining Llamas founded the Anvil of Wobbling, but then the Tears of Sacking from the Undulating Punch of the Limp Knife conquered it and set up a new government called the "Sticks of Sticking" is just word-soup gibberish. None of these names have context behind them.

I tend to imagine that the dwarven language has various colloquialisms that translate poorly to English. I enjoy making up the reasons for silly names, like "The Anvil of Wobbling was a fortress named for it's tumultuous early leadership," or "The Tears of Sacking was a band of particularly evil goblins who enjoyed the thrill of pillaging and seeing their victims cry." I agree we could use some sort of symbol before or after each kind of name to denote what exactly it is, since the syntax isn't quite as clear as it could be (though if you struggle through it your example is entirely decipherable).

Frankly, if you're ever delved into the etymology of place-names (especially those in foreign languages) you discover just how crude and arbitrary names can be. Check this out and tell me it doesn't read like a joke at first: http://www.omnimap.com/cgi/graphic.pl?images/for-road/67-1081Wd.jpg

That's from a world map of "original" place names translated into English. See what I mean?

So apparently "Nicaragua" doesn't actually have a meaning?

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Urist_McArathos on January 10, 2016, 09:24:11 pm

I'm more interested in finding out how they got a definition for "Idaho", considering its actual meaning is "Some white guy pulled this word out of his ass and claimed it was a Native American word".

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Salmeuk on January 10, 2016, 10:33:20 pm

That was my first thought when I read the map (beyond literally thinking it was a joke map), but I believe they went back and tried to use what knowledge we have of indigenous languages to find the original name. Apparently the full map offers multiple translations, and the company does have a "translations not definitive" disclaimer. I would think of the map and the names as an artifact of our current era rather than a porthole into times past.

I didn't mean to derail the thread, sorry. I still think a good utility would be one titled something like "Dwarven Analytics," where it pops up a window and graphs for how many dwarves like both steel and short swords, or more realistically both olive wood wood and schist. You could track the majority interests of your various nobles in order to better outfit their dining halls, and breed certain animals should a large number of dwarves like keas or something. Wolfram Alpha for dwarven personalities. I think dwarf therapist has a few of these functions but I don't use it so I can't say.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Shazbot on January 11, 2016, 12:58:59 am

Everything I know about game design I learned from Extra Credit, but this is a prime example of depth versus complexity. The game's randomly generated languages, titans, creatures, civilizations, names, and materials all add up to a lot of complexity. This obscures the actual information the player needs. It has been problematic in the past, and the lobby for more randomly generated "content" is going to exacerbate it. I am genuinely concerned this game is going to become incomprehensible with enough randomizing.

There definitely needs to be changes made to name pools (kingdoms called 'Kingdom of', etc) and toggles for translated names. Going from Dwarven to English last names already confuses me when deciding which Rovod to give a door engraved with an image of Rovod Channelflares. Is that Rovod Koruzmid or Rovod Karuzmid in the room assignment sidebar?

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Urist_McArathos on January 11, 2016, 11:30:12 am

Scanning back over the thread again, it really seems like the problem here isn't depth but the interface, as already stated.

I'm not sure how to resolve that since we'll probably get more depth and detail LONG before we get an already way overdue UI overhaul.  We'll almost certainly have to rely on a mod to parse everything into easily browsed and searched windows.  Any volunteers?  I would but I can barely code as it is, and even then only in python.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Shazbot on January 11, 2016, 02:32:47 pm

Overhaul the UI? You might as well ask for sewage in our sewers.

I'm getting kind of bitter, aren't I.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Dirst on January 11, 2016, 02:46:05 pm

I recall the first time I looked at a Thoughts and Preferences screen back in 0.34.11.  My thought was "And I'm supposed to keep track of all of this?"  Turns out you don't need to pay it any mind unless you want to.  I do agree that it should be presented in manageable chucks, preferably when it is having some impact on gameplay.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Shazbot on January 11, 2016, 03:50:02 pm

I have only recently learned that liked materials or objects get a quality bonus when crafted. It had been seven years.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Dorsidwarf on January 11, 2016, 06:53:05 pm

Quote from: Niddhoger on January 10, 2016, 02:37:08 pm

I just think there needs to be better naming schemes.  Refugees can have one set of names different from performing troupes, and both of those are different from colony-founding groups and city governments.  Either use different word banks "Rags of Despair," or simply call them "The refugees of X"  A founding group can be "Civilization name _ Founders _ Insert random shit here"

As you mentioned, hearing that the Wet Socks of the Ragining Llamas founded the Anvil of Wobbling, but then the Tears of Sacking from the Undulating Punch of the Limp Knife conquered it and set up a new government called the "Sticks of Sticking" is just word-soup gibberish. None of these names have context behind them.

This, so much. The world needs more titles & distinctions, so we can identify which things are important at a glance, rather than painstakingly searching.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Vattic on January 11, 2016, 07:31:45 pm

Quote from: Shazbot on January 11, 2016, 12:58:59 am

I am genuinely concerned this game is going to become incomprehensible with enough randomizing.

Handily it's a concern Toady has mentioned himself regarding procedural generation. It's part of the reason a semi-typical fantasy base has been stuck to instead of having completely generated species.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Boltgun on January 12, 2016, 05:02:05 am

Quote from: Dorsidwarf on January 11, 2016, 06:53:05 pm

This, so much. The world needs more titles & distinctions, so we can identify which things are important at a glance, rather than painstakingly searching.

Naming things is fairly precise and can be easily modded, I wonder why default civs do not make a good use of that.

Also, if you keep playing, you'll notice one dwarf that stand out from the others (usually your general if you fight sieges) and then you'll pay attention to their story. Your random farmers do not need attention and can be treated as background characters.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Urlance Woolsbane on January 12, 2016, 03:05:52 pm

I don't mean to act as if real-life names are supremely purposeful, but most real-life names signify something, even if it's simply "well, this sounds like it's Native American..."

The only reason behind "The Buff Skunk" is that it's an animal, and elves like animals. Now, if this were the name of a Dwarven group trying to sound elven, that would be one thing. But for an elf civ, it's the equivalent of randomly calling an Italian town "the Mustachioed Pizza."

Now, if an elven civ were called "Skunkland," that would be odd, but at least comprehendable. Even if it was a completely random choice, at least the player should think "I bet that country had a lot of skunks."

So yeah, the line between word soup and pseudo-meaningful names is thin, but it exists.

Quote from: Vattic on January 11, 2016, 07:31:45 pm

Quote from: Shazbot on January 11, 2016, 12:58:59 am

I am genuinely concerned this game is going to become incomprehensible with enough randomizing.

Handily it's a concern Toady has mentioned himself regarding procedural generation. It's part of the reason a semi-typical fantasy base has been stuck to instead of having completely generated species.

I believe that the eventual plan is to allow the player to determine the degree of randomancy, with the game generating guides to the things it creates. 

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Salmeuk on January 13, 2016, 04:43:11 am

Quote from: Urlance Woolsbane on January 12, 2016, 03:05:52 pm

So yeah, the line between word soup and pseudo-meaningful names is thin, but it exists.

It's also subjective where that line stands, oddly enough.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: exdeath on January 13, 2016, 07:31:35 am

Quote from: Vattic on January 11, 2016, 07:31:45 pm

Quote from: Shazbot on January 11, 2016, 12:58:59 am

I am genuinely concerned this game is going to become incomprehensible with enough randomizing.

Handily it's a concern Toady has mentioned himself regarding procedural generation. It's part of the reason a semi-typical fantasy base has been stuck to instead of having completely generated species.

So the game will never have abiogenesis, and you will always have people suddently appearing at the map?

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Vattic on January 13, 2016, 10:34:14 am

Quote from: exdeath on January 13, 2016, 07:31:35 am

So the game will never have abiogenesis, and you will always have people suddently appearing at the map?

Well there is a myth generator in the works which should eventually explain where things came from; Of abiogenesis specifically I haven't heard mention. There is already simple genetics, but no speciation (can't image this would be an easy task). I know at one point Toady thought of having people migrate in from off the edges of the map, but have no idea if this is planned.

Quote from: Urlance Woolsbane on January 12, 2016, 03:05:52 pm

I believe that the eventual plan is to allow the player to determine the degree of randomancy, with the game generating guides to the things it creates.

Indeed and we already can to some extent in advanced worldgen.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: imperator on January 22, 2016, 11:46:03 pm

Quote from: Drathnoxis on January 09, 2016, 02:46:33 pm

This is true, but there is a reason that fantasy novels don't usually have 50+ main characters, it's just too much.

I think if each dwarf was treated as a side character it would be more effective. Say if Bomrek Eribbasan from above, instead having the personality of a wall of text, the same as any dwarf, was put off by merrymaking is pleased by her own appearance and talents, likes lions, and prefers to consume hake and demon rat. This personality is a lot more distinct than before when she was kind of nice, kind of egotistical, kind of determined, kind of cowardly, etc.

We have too many games where there is "too little".  So for once I don't mind having a game where there is too much.

As far as the personality screen, the human psyche is very complex.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Shazbot on January 22, 2016, 11:59:17 pm

The problem with too much is it will be disregarded by the player, and end up no better than too little. The interface already pains us to keep track of which dwarf is which. Their names are word soup, their graphical representation is a handful of colors, and fortresses of any meaningful number of dwarves become a Brownian motion of colored smiley faces.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: imperator on January 23, 2016, 12:36:44 am

Quote from: Shazbot on January 22, 2016, 11:59:17 pm

The problem with too much is it will be disregarded by the player, and end up no better than too little. The interface already pains us to keep track of which dwarf is which. Their names are word soup, their graphical representation is a handful of colors, and fortresses of any meaningful number of dwarves become a Brownian motion of colored smiley faces.

I'd rather have too much and be able to disregard the things I don't find important at that time, than too little and end up with a game that quickly loses my interest.  Simply because the game simulates something doesn't mean we have to be constantly paying attention to it.  Part of the challenge of the game is to strategically determine when/when not to focus on something.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Oort on January 23, 2016, 01:23:39 am

I feel like a big part of the atmosphere of dwarf fortress is being able to "zoom in." Maybe you don't care what every dwarf in your fortress looks like, but if someone does something badass you can take a closer look and get a very specific description. The same idea applies to so many elements of the game.

As a GM in a variety of fantasy tabletop RPGs, I've found that one of the most important parts of creating a convincing world is giving it as much detail as a player is willing to look for. Dwarf fortress is the only video game in existence that actually stands in for a human being BSing in order to create a world with enough detail to fill the imagination. Yeah, it's even harder to get into than rolling dice and eating bad pizza and arguing about rules, but once you learn how to connect with it you'll be glad all the detail is there.

(Although, impassioned defense of dwarf fortress aside, there's always places where the information could be made more accessible or easier to filter.)

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Shazbot on January 23, 2016, 01:38:34 am

That isn't a challenge. That's false difficulty through complexity, a problem Dwarf Fortress suffers.

I picked up MiG-21 for DCS and flew around a lot in a 1959 Soviet jet fighter. It has a cockpit like the control panel of a steam locomotive. Dials buttons and switches, labels in Russian and a radar that has to warm up for five minutes while sipping 180-proof vodka as coolant. But all information I need as a pilot is there, the information I need most is prominent, and the information I need least is tucked away. Most information is clustered by relevant information; radar switches are this panel by the radar, compass switches are this panel over here, and engine start up is basically flipping all the switches from the back right to the back left, approximately in order. And while the game constantly simulates the battery's voltage, I only have to pay attention to it when the warning light comes on. It isn't a "challenge" to avoid staring at the voltmeter, because its tucked away behind the flight stick down by my feet instead of cluttering the radar.

This isn't complex. Its deep. Some Soviet designer burned through his quota of graph paper and pencils to make the most user-friendly interface he could out of dials and colored lights. Information I need is where I need it, and information I don't need is still logically sorted and cued to my attention by a light or a buzzer. The only complexity is local; the labels are in Russian, which is a somewhat more orderly Moonspeak than dwarven. Even so, I can see patterns in the letters that match sounds from English and figure out which radio channel Krymnsk ground control is by logical guesswork.

Dwarven is not only Moonspeak, it is randomly generated Moonspeak matched to randomly generated words which themselves have only an occasional similarity to their concept. For example, The Hatchets of Blazing. Is it a civilization, a site group, a refugee band, a performance troop? After all these years, I've only learned "Urist" is "Dagger". This makes a lot of complexity. On top of this, dwarf mode alternates between giving me English and Dwarven last names depending on which menu I'm in. This is complexity. Then there's just the UI as a whole. Conquering the keystroke combinations to do a task isn't a challenge. Once again, its difficulty through complexity.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: hagr on January 23, 2016, 11:27:34 pm

My biggest issue is that every single book is counted as an artifact now. They are just books like every other item. When I go to legends mode, I don't want to sift through every pamphlet scribbled down to find a slab or book of secrets.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Chevaleresse on January 24, 2016, 01:56:54 am

The problem with the aircraft analogy is that DF simply isn't designed to be user friendly, at least not in the same way. UI improvement comes after gameplay adjustments which come after changes to the simulation. The fighter is ultimately meant to do one thing and everything else it does and shows you is aiming toward that set goal. DF is not. It's meant to spit out a living, breathing world, not to perform at maximum efficiency at all times. Could the UI be better? Of course, the UI is terrible. But "too much detail" doesn't exist beyond FPS concerns.

That said, there are a lot of ways the detail could be parsed in a somewhat more user-friendly way:
1. Consistency between Dwarven/English menus. I'm of the opinion that every menu should have the English last names, at least for your native civ. (A goblin might show up as Gob Goblinspeak, but it should be Urist Englishwords - unless you're playing as goblins.)
2. Some sort of way to move smoothly between related menus - perhaps clicking/scrolling to and selecting the need for abstract thought brings up a list of libraries the dwarf could be assigned to, for example.
3. As mentioned earlier, a parsing of personalities, where the full personality detail could be toggled on, but the default would only show the "notable" traits.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Salmeuk on January 24, 2016, 11:52:37 pm

I, for one, am thankful Toady doesn't exhibit the design mentality of a Soviet aerospace engineer, though that was a great post to read. I think you've tripped up a bit though with your argument about false difficulty through complexity. While it's a valid design consideration that difficulty should be found in the game and not the interface(which is how I'm interpreting your argument in that complexity = meta-confusion over the process of play rather than play itself), DF isn't trying to be difficult. The argument doesn't apply because everyone already knows the df ui is meh, and that it isn't a deliberate decision to have names of things be so damn confusing. It's a result of his dev process, which is why you need to have some patience with the state of the interface.

 I still don't really have trouble understanding the category of titles, but I think I've just been playing long enough that context is enough.

Just imagine that playing DF is like sitting in the cockpit of a plane designed not for ease of use but ease of production. Absolutely no concessions (note how this isn't true for DF) have been made for the pilot's task of flying the plane, and instead switches and dials are located in absurd, tough to reach places simply because it was cheaper to build it that way. However, due to this design philosophy the plane is better to fly, once you invest in the controls.

No, I'm not defending the u.i., just helping you to understand why it's as lackluster as it is.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Sprin on January 25, 2016, 01:08:11 pm

Well you don't HAVE to read all that and know dwarves are precious snow flakes
You can just set them on fire

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Sutremaine on January 25, 2016, 02:55:05 pm

Quote from: Drathnoxis on January 09, 2016, 02:46:33 pm

I think if each dwarf was treated as a side character it would be more effective. Say if Bomrek Eribbasan from above, instead having the personality of a wall of text, the same as any dwarf, was put off by merrymaking is pleased by her own appearance and talents, likes lions, and prefers to consume hake and demon rat. This personality is a lot more distinct than before when she was kind of nice, kind of egotistical, kind of determined, kind of cowardly, etc.

Every dwarf is the main character of their own life.

That said, the last part gives me an interesting idea. Perhaps there could be a filter for displaying traits. You could set it to display everything, as it does currently, or show only the strongest deviations from the norm. You know the sliding scales in adventurer mode character gen? Kind of like that. 'Filter ---' to 'Filter < --- >' to 'Filter << --- >>' and maybe to 'Filter <<< --- >>>' if you didn't want it on screen at all.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Parsely on January 25, 2016, 06:09:16 pm

You're only supposed to read them if a specific dwarf interests you and you want to know more about how to torture them. You don't HAVE to know or use all this detail, but it IS there if you want it.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Dorsidwarf on January 26, 2016, 05:46:01 am

The people parroting "it's all optional" might be more useful if they read his actual complaint - that 'grey goo' proceduralisation and excessive detail have made it confusing and overwhelming to get data he wants about, for example, his dwarves.
He wants to know whether dabbling swords dwarf X is worth training up, he has to sort through the information that they are unfettered by academic discourse, value knowledge in all forms, and we're once a member of an unknown organisation called the Wavering of Wheels. What's that group? There's no way to tell without external interfaces or time consuming saves cunning only to find that this was a group of refugees from the fortress The Ashes of Prancing after the Group of Benigness overthrew it.

And after all that stuff sorted through, she is very weak and abhors violence in all forms.

DF needs to sort its dwarf info out, man. Not less detail, but arranged more usefully.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Shonai_Dweller on January 26, 2016, 06:09:16 am

While I agree that the issue is presentation of information not amount (the more the better, thanks!). What the OP actually said there was too much information and that cutting it down is the solution. Most responders disagreed and the main suggestion was that if arranged better, 10 times the information would still be fun.

Quote from: Drathnoxis on January 09, 2016, 02:02:36 am

I created a small world with 7 civs and 150 years to try to cut back on how much was going on, but still I have 8.5k historical figures and 400 different groups and sites and about 200 artifacts made by necromancers and it's just way, way, way too much to even read a fraction of let alone remember or comprehend

I think it's interesting to have a bit of randomly generated detail to give individual character, but the game crossed the line between interesting and completely and utterly overwhelming about 50 miles ago. I really think less is more in this situation. If every dwarf only had 1 or 2 likes and personality traits it would make them stand out a lot more than having a wall of text. I might be able to follow the events of the world if every group of random vagrants didn't give themselves a stupid name and think their trudge across the desert of loathing was as important as the fact that the capitol city of my dwarves was just conquered by the elves. Why do we even so many group names anyway? There's the civilization name, the group name, and the site name. Couldn't we just ditch the middle one so instead of the Living Tombs from the Handle of Zeal founding Bootproblems, it's just the Handle of Zeal founds Bootproblems? Why do they need to be an independent group as well as part of a civilization?

Does anybody actually read all this stuff and not find it completely repetitive and overwhelming?

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Parsely on January 26, 2016, 06:54:19 am

Quote from: Dorsidwarf on January 26, 2016, 05:46:01 am

The people parroting "it's all optional" might be more useful if they read his actual complaint - that 'grey goo' proceduralisation and excessive detail have made it confusing and overwhelming to get data he wants about, for example, his dwarves. \

He wants to know whether dabbling swords dwarf X is worth training up, he has to sort through the information that they are unfettered by academic discourse, value knowledge in all forms, and we're once a member of an unknown organisation called the Wavering of Wheels. What's that group? There's no way to tell without external interfaces or time consuming saves cunning only to find that this was a group of refugees from the fortress The Ashes of Prancing after the Group of Benigness overthrew it.

And after all that stuff sorted through, she is very weak and abhors violence in all forms.

DF needs to sort its dwarf info out, man. Not less detail, but arranged more usefully.

You've taken his opinion and substituted your own. That's not what he said in the OP. He suggested less detail, not better ways of finding it.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Dorsidwarf on January 26, 2016, 06:18:44 pm

Quote from: GUNINANRUNIN on January 26, 2016, 06:54:19 am

Quote from: Dorsidwarf on January 26, 2016, 05:46:01 am

The people parroting "it's all optional" might be more useful if they read his actual complaint - that 'grey goo' proceduralisation and excessive detail have made it confusing and overwhelming to get data he wants about, for example, his dwarves. \

He wants to know whether dabbling swords dwarf X is worth training up, he has to sort through the information that they are unfettered by academic discourse, value knowledge in all forms, and we're once a member of an unknown organisation called the Wavering of Wheels. What's that group? There's no way to tell without external interfaces or time consuming saves cunning only to find that this was a group of refugees from the fortress The Ashes of Prancing after the Group of Benigness overthrew it.

And after all that stuff sorted through, she is very weak and abhors violence in all forms.

DF needs to sort its dwarf info out, man. Not less detail, but arranged more usefully.

You've taken his opinion and substituted your own. That's not what he said in the OP. He suggested less detail, not better ways of finding it.

After a rea-read of his post, I find myself forced to agree that I misread it.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Urist_McArathos on January 26, 2016, 10:06:20 pm

Quote from: Dorsidwarf on January 26, 2016, 06:18:44 pm

Quote from: GUNINANRUNIN on January 26, 2016, 06:54:19 am

Quote from: Dorsidwarf on January 26, 2016, 05:46:01 am

The people parroting "it's all optional" might be more useful if they read his actual complaint - that 'grey goo' proceduralisation and excessive detail have made it confusing and overwhelming to get data he wants about, for example, his dwarves. \

He wants to know whether dabbling swords dwarf X is worth training up, he has to sort through the information that they are unfettered by academic discourse, value knowledge in all forms, and we're once a member of an unknown organisation called the Wavering of Wheels. What's that group? There's no way to tell without external interfaces or time consuming saves cunning only to find that this was a group of refugees from the fortress The Ashes of Prancing after the Group of Benigness overthrew it.

And after all that stuff sorted through, she is very weak and abhors violence in all forms.

DF needs to sort its dwarf info out, man. Not less detail, but arranged more usefully.

You've taken his opinion and substituted your own. That's not what he said in the OP. He suggested less detail, not better ways of finding it.

After a rea-read of his post, I find myself forced to agree that I misread it.

"On your left, you'll see the closest Bay12 ever normally gets to a flame war..."

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Dozebôm Lolumzalìs on January 26, 2016, 10:33:40 pm

Bay12, the one place on the internet where people admit they're wrong.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Deon on January 27, 2016, 07:54:49 am

Most of the stuff was already said here, and it is pretty obvious for long-term players. DF interface is MEH and it is much better if you play with side utilities like Legends Viewer and Dwarf Therapist.

It's just the development process. Toady One focuses on other stuff before presentation.

And you are welcome to make a utility which will sort through your dwarves and point at the important information.
You can also mod raws to make personality traits pretty much static, that way you can get rid of those you don't like.

The naming process is the only thing I have a gripe with. Hopefully it is going to be improved with time.

By the way, if you are one of those who want to "find people better fit for a role", Dwarf Therapist does it for you:
(http://i.imgur.com/eFZFOpp.png)

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Dirst on January 28, 2016, 11:35:12 am

Quote from: jwoodward48df on January 26, 2016, 10:33:40 pm

Bay12, the one place on the internet where people admit they're wrong.

Have we just proved that bay12forums.com is not on the Internet?

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: miauw62 on January 28, 2016, 06:48:20 pm

Bay12? Free of flamewars? I'll give the gay dwarves thread as a recent-ish example.

Also Deon dorsi specifically mentioned "without external utilities", which seems fair. There is no way to get to know more about dwarves' previous groups without legends viewer or opening a copy of the save in legends mode. Same goes for figures on engravings and many other things.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Shonai_Dweller on January 28, 2016, 10:23:25 pm

Quote from: miauw62 on January 28, 2016, 06:48:20 pm

Bay12? Free of flamewars? I'll give the gay dwarves thread as a recent-ish example.

Also Deon dorsi specifically mentioned "without external utilities", which seems fair. There is no way to get to know more about dwarves' previous groups without legends viewer or opening a copy of the save in legends mode. Same goes for figures on engravings and many other things.

But vanilla DF offers you the option to export maps and an (incomplete) xml of legends in order for you to browse in a more convenient form. So it's kind of expecting you to use something like legends viewer.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Dozebôm Lolumzalìs on January 28, 2016, 11:05:33 pm

Quote from: miauw62 on January 28, 2016, 06:48:20 pm

Bay12? Free of flamewars? I'll give the gay dwarves thread as a recent-ish example.

I never said it's free of flamewars, I just said people sometimes-ish admit they're wrong.

Which is still better than most of the internet.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Ghills on January 29, 2016, 01:29:57 pm

Quote from: miauw62 on January 28, 2016, 06:48:20 pm

Bay12? Free of flamewars? I'll give the gay dwarves thread as a recent-ish example.

Also Deon dorsi specifically mentioned "without external utilities", which seems fair. There is no way to get to know more about dwarves' previous groups without legends viewer or opening a copy of the save in legends mode. Same goes for figures on engravings and many other things.

There was a flamewar about that? I vaguely remember people disagreeing, but nothing serious.

Practically requiring people to use external utilities and/or mods to understand, and quite often to play, the game is a shoddy, amateur mistake that other game studios get crucified for.  I will never understand why people give Toady a pass for it.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Urlance Woolsbane on January 29, 2016, 02:16:37 pm

Quote from: Ghills on January 29, 2016, 01:29:57 pm

Practically requiring people to use external utilities and/or mods to understand, and quite often to play, the game is a shoddy, amateur mistake that other game studios get crucified for.  I will never understand why people give Toady a pass for it.

A few things. First of all, they're not required. I play DF without the aid of any external utilities, just fine. I think people over emphasize the degree to which one needs to micromanage one's fort.

Secondly, Dwarf Fortress is a perpetual alpha, gratis. If I had to pay for DF, I know that I'd expect a lot more out of it. As it is, I don't, so I'm quite thankful that I get to play it at all.

Finally, DF isn't just another game. Its simulatory nature, its lack of an endpoint, etc. mean that its shortcomings are far less crippling than they would be for a standard game. There is a plethora of things to do in DF, and if one doesn't work, there are always others that do.
 

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: cephalo on January 29, 2016, 03:08:50 pm

Didn't read the whole thread, but I wanted to say that all the details serve to give confidence that the detail is there if needed. It functions as a guide for your internal story crafting while you play.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Salmeuk on January 29, 2016, 03:12:53 pm

Quote from: Ghills on January 29, 2016, 01:29:57 pm

Quote from: miauw62 on January 28, 2016, 06:48:20 pm

Bay12? Free of flamewars? I'll give the gay dwarves thread as a recent-ish example.

Also Deon dorsi specifically mentioned "without external utilities", which seems fair. There is no way to get to know more about dwarves' previous groups without legends viewer or opening a copy of the save in legends mode. Same goes for figures on engravings and many other things.

There was a flamewar about that? I vaguely remember people disagreeing, but nothing serious.

Practically requiring people to use external utilities and/or mods to understand, and quite often to play, the game is a shoddy, amateur mistake that other game studios get crucified for.  I will never understand why people give Toady a pass for it.

As it stands DF absolutely does not require external utilities to play. I'm not sure how people manage to get stuck on the idea that the obtuse interface is literally impossible to wrangle. Utilities have their function, and one can hope to see them incorporated into the base game one day, but everything great about vanilla DF can be enjoyed without DFhack or therapist or stonesense. Yes, even 3-d visualizers can be substituted by imagination.

And if you can't see why DF has as much respect as it does, consider how independent projects are judged not only for their production of content but also for the motivation behind that production. DF has both worthy motivations and intriguingly unique content. People flock to this game and stomach the interface, the bugs, and the interface bugs for a reason!

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Blucher on February 01, 2016, 07:51:47 pm

I do think there is too much detail at times: animal/body parts, wood, lots of other things.  I give stone, metal, and gems a pass because this is a game about dwarves after all.  And of course much of it is presented poorly.  But this is Toady's game, and it is a great game (arguably the best game I've ever played), warts and all.  I deal with it by just ignoring the stuff that I don't care about.

The only time I get a bit annoyed at the extreme level of detail is when my fort begins to die from FPS, which inevitably happens. I can't help but think all those (useless to me) details swirling around are grinding the game down to a halt.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Iamblichus on February 01, 2016, 10:38:48 pm

Quote from: Salmeuk on January 29, 2016, 03:12:53 pm

Quote from: Ghills on January 29, 2016, 01:29:57 pm

Quote from: miauw62 on January 28, 2016, 06:48:20 pm

Bay12? Free of flamewars? I'll give the gay dwarves thread as a recent-ish example.

Also Deon dorsi specifically mentioned "without external utilities", which seems fair. There is no way to get to know more about dwarves' previous groups without legends viewer or opening a copy of the save in legends mode. Same goes for figures on engravings and many other things.

There was a flamewar about that? I vaguely remember people disagreeing, but nothing serious.

Practically requiring people to use external utilities and/or mods to understand, and quite often to play, the game is a shoddy, amateur mistake that other game studios get crucified for.  I will never understand why people give Toady a pass for it.

As it stands DF absolutely does not require external utilities to play. I'm not sure how people manage to get stuck on the idea that the obtuse interface is literally impossible to wrangle. Utilities have their function, and one can hope to see them incorporated into the base game one day, but everything great about vanilla DF can be enjoyed without DFhack or therapist or stonesense. Yes, even 3-d visualizers can be substituted by imagination.

And if you can't see why DF has as much respect as it does, consider how independent projects are judged not only for their production of content but also for the motivation behind that production. DF has both worthy motivations and intriguingly unique content. People flock to this game and stomach the interface, the bugs, and the interface bugs for a reason!

Well personally I waited for DFHack and Dwarf Therapist before I started playing the newest version but I don't think that detracts from Toady's accomplishment in any way.  On the contrary, as strong, active modding community is a hallmark of a great game.  I wouldn't want to play SimCity 4 without NAM and a bunch of other mods but that doesn't mean it isn't one of the greatest games ever made.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: pikachu17 on February 02, 2016, 11:22:19 am

stop complaining you don't need to know any of this stuff, but IF you want to you can. you can just look at the parts of the wall of text that are important to you, and ignore the rest.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Lightfoot on February 02, 2016, 06:11:16 pm

You can never have too much detail. I'm pretty new to the game and it's the detail that has sucked me in. Even to the level of ensuring that I make beds out of the appropriate variety of wood and decorating items with specific varieties of gizzard stones, cut stones and green glass.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: pikachu17 on February 03, 2016, 10:14:55 am

actually I think legends mode needs more detail

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: pikachu17 on February 05, 2016, 03:06:44 pm

Maybe toady could add a key in view-unit mode to toggle what information is seen.
after pressing the button you get to a small toggling information screen
and for legends mode won't legend-viewer or some other utility work to untangle all the information? I don't know because I don't have it.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Ghills on February 09, 2016, 10:18:10 am

Quote from: Salmeuk on January 29, 2016, 03:12:53 pm

Quote from: Ghills on January 29, 2016, 01:29:57 pm

Quote from: miauw62 on January 28, 2016, 06:48:20 pm

Bay12? Free of flamewars? I'll give the gay dwarves thread as a recent-ish example.

Also Deon dorsi specifically mentioned "without external utilities", which seems fair. There is no way to get to know more about dwarves' previous groups without legends viewer or opening a copy of the save in legends mode. Same goes for figures on engravings and many other things.

There was a flamewar about that? I vaguely remember people disagreeing, but nothing serious.

Practically requiring people to use external utilities and/or mods to understand, and quite often to play, the game is a shoddy, amateur mistake that other game studios get crucified for.  I will never understand why people give Toady a pass for it.

As it stands DF absolutely does not require external utilities to play. I'm not sure how people manage to get stuck on the idea that the obtuse interface is literally impossible to wrangle. Utilities have their function, and one can hope to see them incorporated into the base game one day, but everything great about vanilla DF can be enjoyed without DFhack or therapist or stonesense. Yes, even 3-d visualizers can be substituted by imagination.

And if you can't see why DF has as much respect as it does, consider how independent projects are judged not only for their production of content but also for the motivation behind that production. DF has both worthy motivations and intriguingly unique content. People flock to this game and stomach the interface, the bugs, and the interface bugs for a reason!

Dude, I think you need to take a chill pill.  You are way, way too upset about this.

Toady's amazing accomplishment is not invalidated by, and does not invalidate the fact that DF's interface is horrifying and obtuse, or the fact that for many players external utilities are indeed required.  That people go to the effort of creating things like DwarfTherapist and DFHack means that a significant part of the userbase, perhaps the majority, feel they are required for good / fun gameplay.

Acknowledging that Toady's chosen methods have immense flaws is not being 'disrespectful', and I'm not at all sure how you got that idea.  It's acknowledging the current realities of playing Dwarf Fortress. 

There are many players who do not play without DwarfTherapist, a tileset, DFHack, or all 3.  There's nothing wrong with this. Equally, there's nothing wrong with playing without those tools - but there's nothing right about that either. That so many players use external tools clearly shows that the current state of DF lacks good ways to handle vital tasks.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: pikachu17 on February 09, 2016, 11:32:13 am

Quote

Dude, I think you need to take a chill pill.  You are way, way too upset about this.

Toady's amazing accomplishment is not invalidated by, and does not invalidate the fact that DF's interface is horrifying and obtuse, or the fact that for many players external utilities are indeed required.  That people go to the effort of creating things like DwarfTherapist and DFHack means that a significant part of the userbase, perhaps the majority, feel they are required for good / fun gameplay.

Acknowledging that Toady's chosen methods have immense flaws is not being 'disrespectful', and I'm not at all sure how you got that idea.  It's acknowledging the current realities of playing Dwarf Fortress. 

There are many players who do not play without DwarfTherapist, a tileset, DFHack, or all 3.  There's nothing wrong with this. Equally, there's nothing wrong with playing without those tools - but there's nothing right about that either. That so many players use external tools clearly shows that the current state of DF lacks good ways to handle vital tasks.

I hate tilesets. when people use them on youtube I can not tell what is happening. I do not have big forts. maybe when I have a big fort i'll use dwarf therapist but I do not now. I use dfhack, but mostly because I like gui/advfort and gui/create-item

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Salmeuk on February 10, 2016, 05:17:10 am

Quote from: Ghills on February 09, 2016, 10:18:10 am

Dude, I think you need to take a chill pill.  You are way, way too upset about this.

I'm hardly worked up about this, and I can't see why arguing about the finer details of a topic I care about should be interpreted as "getting upset."

"I'm not sure how people manage to get stuck on the idea that the obtuse interface is literally impossible to wrangle."

This was probably the most hostile part of my post, and I stand behind it. It doesn't suggest addons are morally wrong, nor does it preclude their use, nor do I insult those who use addons (this would be especially odd because I use DFhack myself). It's just my experiences with posters demanding interface improvements and criticizing the devs for failing to provide have made me want to speak against that notion that the interface is impossible. It just isn't, proof being me and a gazijillion other players who download and play the newest updates as soon as they show up.

Quote from: Ghills on February 09, 2016, 10:18:10 am

Acknowledging that Toady's chosen methods have immense flaws is not being 'disrespectful', and I'm not at all sure how you got that idea.  It's acknowledging the current realities of playing Dwarf Fortress. 

I don't think I ever said it was disrespectful (and I'm not at all sure how you got that idea) to state criticisms of the current state of the game, so thanks for reminding me - I'll just say it now.

. . .

Just kidding! There is a certain lack of respect towards the devs when a person waltzs up with a list of "Undoubtedly Necessary Improvements I Thought of Last Night" and expects hasty implementation, but just criticizing the game or the dev process? That's awesome.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Perhaps I'm more concerned with the lack of respect towards the search function, considering these sorts of posts are fairly regular around here and many echo the same, tired points. Most fail to acknowledge that the need for interface improvements has already been, well, acknowledged.

However, if you think your criticisms of the development process ("Toady's chosen methods have immense flaws") are objective statements and not just opinions, then you might have trouble understanding my viewpoint.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Sort of unrelated, but I once attended a games journalism meetup at my college, where everyone was asked to name themselves and their favorite game. I remember stating "Dwarf Fortress, the only true game. . . " in a sort of sardonic fashion (hey I was younger then) and one woman from the front immediately spouted, "Dwarf fortress isn't a game!" I was so shocked at her opinion-shared-as-fact I couldn't think to say anything back. I did my best to understand her perspective (well, as best as I could guess what that perspective was because she later refused to talk to me) and concluded that some people really, really can't stand the "presentation" of DF. This experience informed me on the normal reaction to DF, and I now realize that anyone who attempts to come up with even a smidgen of real criticism is worthy of respect and an open ear.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Grimlocke on February 10, 2016, 08:10:18 am

Quote from: Ghills on February 09, 2016, 10:18:10 am

Dude, I think you need to take a chill pill.  You are way, way too upset about this.

This is pretty annoying and it would be nice if people didn't do this.

Anyhow, more on subject: The game can be played just fine without any external utilities, graphics or mods. It's not 'impossible'. That said it can't be denied that the learning curve without these things is simply too much for the vast majority of potential players, and the utilities can be pretty helpful for larger scale forts.

ASCII graphics all the way though!

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Untrustedlife on February 17, 2016, 02:39:38 pm

Quote from: PrimusRibbus on January 09, 2016, 05:47:50 pm

Quote from: Zarathustra30 on January 09, 2016, 04:14:50 am

You have encountered "Gray Goo", a common problem in Dwarf Fortress.  "Gray Goo" occurs when procedural generation outstrips interest. There so much to care about that you stop caring.

Dwarf Fortress has deep gameplay, and it will keep getting deeper. This should not be resisted; in fact, it is why many people play the game. Instead, attack the other front. Interest cannot be meaningfully increased, but it can be used more effectively.

• Don't display too much information at any one time. Keep the player focused on only a few things, and only when specifically asked for. The new (l)ocations screen is a good example. It is sparse and provides good information with little fluff.
• Provide relevant information in an easily accessible, but non-intrusive place. The player should not feel obligated to remember more than he or she needs to. This is where (l)ocations fails. When assigning occupations, skills and preferences should be available for each of the citizens when specifically requested.
• Context is key! Whenever you provide information, say why the player should care. Don't just say "X killed Y", say "X, a scoundrel from Komutesdor killed his king, Y!" By reusing the player's interest, you can stretch the interest far further.
• Make sure the player actually remembers what he or she has learned. Which is easier to remember: Komutesdor or PoemSells? Sounds are harder to remember than words. If there is no easy translation, use a description, but make sure the player remembers it.

Detail is not the problem. Lack of interest is. The real world is far deeper than any videogame, but humans still function. There is enough interest available, it just has to be used right.

Very, very good post. Procedural generation is fantastic at making big, detailed, unique worlds on the fly. Unfortunately, it's incredibly bad at sorting out relevant and interesting stuff from the chaff, or highlighting things that are meaningful. It's not just an issue with Dwarf Fortress, you can see this phenomena in Elite: Dangerous, Cataclysm: DDA, and many roguelikes.

Frankly, DF's UI really does not help the situation. When you're already fighting procedural generation's tendency to drown interesting stuff in minutiae, choosing to display things like Dwarf personalities and feelings as giant single paragraphs does not do any favors.

My honest advice to OP is to not get invested in your world. DF's procedural generation is a tool to give you a fleshed out, new canvas every time you start a new world; not to give you a coherent world that you can get invested in. It makes for fun new challenges and extends the novelty of the game, but any attachment to the world is going to be through your own story that you're telling at your fort or with your adventurer.

The thing about df is that the world is thoroughly and internally consistent, which means it makes sense, yes you can get invested and (this is my opinion btw)  you benefit from getting invested, just make sure to spread your gameplay equally through fort and adventure mode. Then review the world  (and look for interesting things) with legends, this is more important now that "world activation" is a thing . Since the world and the people in it and what they do are now simulated as you play, not just during world gen.

Sorry for ressing an old post, I just wanted to say my opinion. hehe

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Untrustedlife on February 17, 2016, 02:41:43 pm

Quote from: pikachu17 on February 03, 2016, 10:14:55 am

actually I think legends mode needs more detail

I agree, the more detailed the better and most df players want more complexities, but it does make it harder for newbies to grasp.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Dirst on February 17, 2016, 02:51:22 pm

Quote from: Untrustedlife on February 17, 2016, 02:41:43 pm

Quote from: pikachu17 on February 03, 2016, 10:14:55 am

actually I think legends mode needs more detail

I agree, and most df players want more complexities, but it does make it harder for newbies to grasp.
So he has a sort of point.

This could be fixed with assigning detail levels to each event, and just showing things at or coarser than the selected level.  Coarsest level for a particular figure would be birth and death, set equal to the coarsest level of any event in the figure's life.  Then you can filter figures and events by the coarsest level they have.

The problem is that it will be difficult or impossible for the system to avoid massive clumping at certain levels.  The vast majority of creatures will have no assigned DIFFICULTY, so the only differentiations will be "in a named battle" and "focal figure sustained an injury".

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Putnam on February 19, 2016, 02:55:37 am

Legends mode's event listing for particular ages already has a certain significance level assignment similar to the detail levels you're talking about, though it's binary at this point. I could see that being generalized...

In fact, I think that may be the solution to a lot of the game's problems?? Just a sort of general significance system, such as for creature descriptions or engravings (though, really, all you need to know about engravings is in the K menu, which provides quality and material which is quite enough)

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Libash_Thunderhead on February 21, 2016, 06:41:59 am

My problem is there are too many details about Urist McCrafter creating master piece bone bolts. Thousands of them maybe.
It is inevitable.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Kirkegaard on February 21, 2016, 07:46:40 am

Quote from: Libash_Thunderhead on February 21, 2016, 06:41:59 am

My problem is there are too many details about Urist McCrafter creating master piece bone bolts. Thousands of them maybe.
It is inevitable.

Yeah, there is a lot of stuff like that, makes it really hard to find the important or interesting informations. Maybe the info should be classed into different categories so the player can chose to only show parts of it like X's being attacked, and ignore all X made Y.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: tiresius on February 22, 2016, 04:18:00 pm

Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a mole man die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a mole man die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a mole man die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a mole man die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a mole man die.  Urist McToughGuy enjoyed a sudsy bath.  Urist McToughGuy was overjoyed in seeing a nice statue.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Salmeuk on February 22, 2016, 05:38:39 pm

Quote from: tiresius on February 22, 2016, 04:18:00 pm

Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a mole man die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a mole man die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a mole man die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a mole man die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a mole man die.  Urist McToughGuy enjoyed a sudsy bath.  Urist McToughGuy was overjoyed in seeing a nice statue.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.

It's not very difficult to avoid reading things. Once you understand how the personality screen is organized, flitting your eyeballs past the recent emotional responses paragraph takes, what, an extra millisecond at worst? The things you should care about are highlighted, while everything else is there so you can pick out the hilarious details of a dwarfs personal emotional state.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: tolkafox on February 23, 2016, 12:26:49 am

Quote from: Drathnoxis on January 09, 2016, 02:02:36 am

It's all just random interchangeable gibberish and it's spurting out of every orifice of the game world.

Does anybody actually read all this stuff and not find it completely repetitive and overwhelming?

Fixed. O.o

In short, yes. Yes I do. Especially when I'm assigning dwarfs to be butchers or work outside, it's important that they have traits/preferences for their career and not, lets say, absolutely hate the outdoors or killing animals. I also like to build workshops out of materials they like, and have their furniture decorated with things they like.

You can also control what is shown in the activity logs.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: pikachu17 on February 26, 2016, 03:03:09 pm

i love the detail. once i was attacked by a night creature. when i looked at it, i noticed it had a missing external rib. as it turns out that rib was knocked out by a goblin 33 years earlier. without details it would have been just another monster. with details, it didn't just exist so i could kill it.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Bumber on February 27, 2016, 01:56:55 am

Quote from: tiresius on February 22, 2016, 04:18:00 pm

Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a mole man die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a mole man die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a mole man die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a mole man die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a mole man die.  Urist McToughGuy enjoyed a sudsy bath.  Urist McToughGuy was overjoyed in seeing a nice statue.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a goblin die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.  Urist McToughGuy did not get upset seeing a kea die.

One of my dwarves has 4+ pages of this before I can see anything else. It's kind of ridiculous that they aren't at least stacked by creature type, if not even just "...seeing X wild animals / sentients / enemies die."

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: L0rd L33t on February 29, 2016, 07:22:27 pm

I have mixed feelings about the randomly generated things, here are my thoughts about it:

Titans/ForgottenBeasts: awesome. Each one is a unique monster that creates it's unique story. They're either beyond terrifying a skinless web shooting dimetrodon, or seemingly  innocuous (a giant feathery wombat) that you should not underestimate.

Clowns: Feels awfully redundant. They feel like forgotten beast ripoffs...

names of groups,notorious creatures and establishments: Great even if nonsensical(that can be funny at times). However the SHEER NUMBER of them makes sorting out specific information mind numbing.

Boogeymen: Okay

Night Trolls etc: Honestly I don't like how these are procedurally generated. They have such a specific behavior for being something so random, the random names trick you into thinking you're hunting a new creature you haven't heard about, and the default name of Night Trolls is pretty odd considering they have nothing to do with regular trolls at all.

Personalities: Okay. Can be difficult sorting out good info, at least the many colors of highlighting help with that. My huge beef about that however, is how conflicting information is so common. Urist McIdiot has a poor memory, terrible creativity and does not care about arts and crafts whatsoever. He dreams of creating a masterwork of art someday.

Books: I really like the variety and consistency here (with certian parts being multiple words like 1.Start your day with 2. Dwarven Rum as opposed to gibberish like 1.BEAR 2.PUKE 3.OF THE 4.SOILED 5.PUMPKINS). The consistency actually seems to make it funnier like Question Elephant Behavior or A Guide to Even Merchants etc.

Evil Biomes: Frankly i wish these were separated into two different map-distinguishable (and possibly overlapping) types: 1.Evil biomes with the wicked wildlife and hostile environments 2.Undead/reanimating biomes with syndrome fog/rain. The reasoning behind this is i feel like the undead just seem to take away the attention from the evil creatures, and the syndrome weather can render them nonfactor (the marauding ogres instantly suffocated. No biggie), and on the other side, people wanting to have a reanimating challenge embark might find themselves dissapointed when the biome shows no hint of undead.

Instruments:The names are random, the part amounts are random, the pieces are random material an appearance wise, the availability of certian instruments to be build able are random... CONFUSING! ME HATE! ME HATE! HAAAATE!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TLDR
It seems to me that whenever toady makes a major addition, it's procedurally generated. Some of that stuff is neat, but the more he adds, the more it will seem like a gibbering fever dream of Tzeench then a fantasy environment. (no offense to him or his works, it's still great!)

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Sizik on February 29, 2016, 08:55:02 pm

Quote from: L0rd L33t on February 29, 2016, 07:22:27 pm

Personalities: Okay. Can be difficult sorting out good info, at least the many colors of highlighting help with that. My huge beef about that however, is how conflicting information is so common. Urist McIdiot has a poor memory, terrible creativity and does not care about arts and crafts whatsoever. He dreams of creating a masterwork of art someday.

I'd say that is fairly realistic.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Sutremaine on March 02, 2016, 02:47:41 am

Maybe he wants one so that people will shut up about him not liking arts and crafts. Maybe he's so uncreative that his dreams are based on the culture around him rather than his own feelings. Maybe he really wants to create a work of art worthy of a dwarf, but his poor memory and terrible creativity have defeated him so often that he's gotten sour grapes over this whole crafting thing.

If you to look at everyone on this forum and examine each facet of their personality in turn before assigning it a value, you'd probably find quite a few conflicts when you read the generated text report.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Dozebôm Lolumzalìs on March 02, 2016, 11:05:49 am

Quote from: L0rd L33t on February 29, 2016, 07:22:27 pm

I have mixed feelings about the randomly generated things, here are my thoughts about it:

Titans/ForgottenBeasts: awesome. Each one is a unique monster that creates it's unique story. They're either beyond terrifying a skinless web shooting dimetrodon, or seemingly  innocuous (a giant feathery wombat) that you should not underestimate. Good to see.

Clowns: Feels awfully redundant. They feel like forgotten beast ripoffs... Except they appear in large numbers, are significantly more frequent in their appearance, and, well, what else do you put under the candy?

names of groups,notorious creatures and establishments: Great even if nonsensical(that can be funny at times). However the SHEER NUMBER of them makes sorting out specific information mind numbing. Planned to be improved, and you can even improve it yourself.

Boogeymen: Okay okay

Night Trolls etc: Honestly I don't like how these are procedurally generated. They have such a specific behavior for being something so random, the random names trick you into thinking you're hunting a new creature you haven't heard about, and the default name of Night Trolls is pretty odd considering they have nothing to do with regular trolls at all. They're based on mythology. Isn't Threetoe an Lit major or something?

Personalities: Okay. Can be difficult sorting out good info, at least the many colors of highlighting help with that. My huge beef about that however, is how conflicting information is so common. Urist McIdiot has a poor memory, terrible creativity and does not care about arts and crafts whatsoever. He dreams of creating a masterwork of art someday. This makes sense. Internal inconsistency is quite common in people. Wouldn't you like to make something that is admired, even though you can't make art worth crap and have therefore internalized an apathy toward other people's art?

Books: I really like the variety and consistency here (with certian parts being multiple words like 1.Start your day with 2. Dwarven Rum as opposed to gibberish like 1.BEAR 2.PUKE 3.OF THE 4.SOILED 5.PUMPKINS). The consistency actually seems to make it funnier like Question Elephant Behavior or A Guide to Even Merchants etc. I like books too.

Evil Biomes: Frankly i wish these were separated into two different map-distinguishable (and possibly overlapping) types: 1.Evil biomes with the wicked wildlife and hostile environments 2.Undead/reanimating biomes with syndrome fog/rain. The reasoning behind this is i feel like the undead just seem to take away the attention from the evil creatures, and the syndrome weather can render them nonfactor (the marauding ogres instantly suffocated. No biggie), and on the other side, people wanting to have a reanimating challenge embark might find themselves dissapointed when the biome shows no hint of undead. If you're looking for wicked wildlife, go for a savage biome. You can remove syndrome weather in advanced worldgen.

Instruments:The names are random, the part amounts are random, the pieces are random material an appearance wise, the availability of certian instruments to be build able are random... CONFUSING! ME HATE! ME HATE! HAAAATE! There's a mod going to replace random instruments with RL instruments.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TLDR
It seems to me that whenever toady makes a major addition, it's procedurally generated. Some of that stuff is neat, but the more he adds, the more it will seem like a gibbering fever dream of Tzeench then a fantasy environment. (no offense to him or his works, it's still great!) He's trying to strike a balance, in between "Random Hell" and "Yet Another Stock Fantasy Universe". Right now, he's leaning away from stock fantasy.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Untrustedlife on March 02, 2016, 11:22:59 am

It's not random hell everything happens for a reason and it is consistent. It's more a SIMULATOR then a generator and without all the detail  the simulation is less interesting the more detail the more consistent the world gets and the more immersive it becomes . Those who are against the detail are missing something about the nature of DF.

We need more sweeping randomization that effects the world so each world is its own unique fantasy world with its own unique history.And it is getting there, night trolls do have some unique per creature mannerisms (1 example is some eat people some eat bugs and each "breed" looks unique) you can learn this when you locate their lairs. (Also they are still a WIP)

Clowns are malicious scheming creatures that cause trouble in world gen aswell as fort mode forgotten beasts don't make alliances with gods and receive the protection of a god's Angels . Clowns do and you can banish them in adventure mode if you can locate the vault that holds the demons true name.....There is a whole narrative for each named demon that comes out of worldgen that you can read.. Also when you mine too much candy you unleash a named demon ( the other clowns are just creatures from the underworld who are aligned to the named one (think of it as a general)
Demonic deals are a thing that is planned aswell...

The point of the game is to  experience and effect and take on various roles in unique fantasy worlds, it generates a new fantasy world that is unique every time you create a world. People who jump from world to world instead of staying with one world miss out on the majority of content. Stick with one world play in all modes and you will get what I'm saying.

Each world is its own world with its own history and its own "rules" each world is SUPPOSED to have its own unique properties they aren't supposed to be the same and do (the creatures that exist in one world aren't supposed to be the same in each world) each world is its own singular cohesive world over various worlds it isn't supposed to be cohesive. They are seperate. And they will only get more different as he goes.

If you want you world to stay the same stick to playing that world.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: pikachu17 on March 02, 2016, 12:22:52 pm

what's WIP?

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Bumber on March 02, 2016, 01:00:11 pm

Quote from: pikachu17 on March 02, 2016, 12:22:52 pm

what's WIP?

Work In Progress

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Salmeuk on March 02, 2016, 07:45:53 pm

Contrasting or contradictory personality traits are neccesary to properly depict a dwarf. No person is cohesive to such a degree that all their interests match up with their strengths, or that their weaknesses only lead to fear. Our modern society certainly encourages that sort of self-reflective specialization but it's not particularly common (or healthy). The thing about the personality paragraph is that you really have to read into it the sorts of idiosyncrasies we all carry. It's pretty magical the depth of personality you can find in a few contradictory motivations.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Dozebôm Lolumzalìs on March 08, 2016, 07:32:30 am

Hmm, you're right, it's not so much "random hell" as "incredibly complex and detailed..."

that's not hell! That's heaven!

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: PTTG?? on March 26, 2016, 11:54:41 am

I think the only flaw with Dwarf Fortress' detail level is that it tries to put it all immediately accessible. I imagine that at some unknown future point of DF's development, you might see a "sword" on the ground. If you pick it up and look at it, you'll see it's a fine iron sword with engravings and a leather grip. Examine it closely, and you'll see it's actually a fairly sharp and well-made sword made from poor-quality iron. You'll get a detailed description of the engraving, and the leather will be tanned cowhide. You'll see that there is a bloodstain in the leather, but you won't know who's without magic.

The big difference is that in combat, it's easier to read "The tall man swings his sword at your neck." than "The tall, slightly fat man with detached earlobes, straw-colored hair, and a slightly upturned nose swings his sharpened well-crafted poor-quality-iron sword with an engraving of five rings, the symbol of a political group of dwarven settlers in 1051, with a cow-leather handle stained with Bombreck Bigarm's Dwarf Blood, at your neck."

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Robsoie on March 26, 2016, 12:17:09 pm

The problem is not with the details, but how they're presented, the "don't feel anything when seeing a goblin die" repeated hundred of time in a dwarf information panel when there had been a gob siege exterminated is plain bad presentation, it should be similar to some of the announcements that are stacked, by example "don't feel anything when seeing a goblin die x42" .

A bit like in the adventure mode when you want to report something, if you adventured long enough you have thousands and thousands of useless gameplay-wise events you can report (any random and even completely harmless animal that had seen you during your travels is reported as having fought with you, even if you didn't even saw them)

Maybe there should be some kind of filter options in the init to allow/disallow the display of the useful stuff and the less or (much less) useful ones, so people that want the useful-only information wouldn't have it drowned under the giant (if you played long enough) pile and people that want to know every seconds of their dwarves life could still have the whole pile displayed if they like that.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Shonai_Dweller on March 26, 2016, 08:20:18 pm

I imagine a lot of the 'info on-screen all at once' right now is to help with testing.

The player doesn't need a long list of every single rotting body-part when looking at a Forgotten Beast victim, but for a playtester, having to check if each body-part is correctly rotting one at a time in a series of hidden away 'tidy' menus would be kind of frustrating.

Eventually all the surplus info needs to be hidden away (hopefully still accessible to the curious), but only when serious work starts on what the final interface should and shouldn't be (which will probably be quite a while yet).

On the other hand, there's an emotional reaction upon being confronted with an endless list of rotting body parts, or checking out a dwarf's mind to have it scream Horrifed! Horrified! Horrified! Horrified! Horrified! ... at you which you might not get from neat and tidy menus. Balance is key.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Atomisk on March 27, 2016, 05:30:52 am

Quote from: Salmeuk on January 09, 2016, 05:06:29 am

Try a hermit challenge, too. Choose your fav from the starting seven and murder the rest, then open a hole-in-the-wall tavern in the middle of the desert. DO IT NOW

aaaaand i'll be picking up fort mode again... gonna play stardwarf valley with a fuckin peahen and dwarf who can probably do anything if he puts his mind to it. :P

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: GoblinCookie on March 28, 2016, 06:44:54 am

Play with hidden history, it tidies away the details quite nicely.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Xazo-Tak on March 28, 2016, 06:23:25 pm

The problem is that all the information given to the player cannot be utilized or viewed efficiently.
I'd love it if I could say "Okay, all the dwarves that want to craft a masterwork someday go into crafting or engraving jobs, and all the dwarves that are strong go into mining, and all the dwarves that are good fighters join the military...".
But instead I have to peer into each dwarf's details, compare it with a chart that shows which traits affect which skills, then start manually turning job allocations on and off.
I don't do that of course, it'd drive one insane, but I hate how unless you do that the job allocations of your dwarves make no sense and are not based on demand or desire.
If this game wasn't going out of its way to have a nostalgic Roguelike graphical style, it'd be possible to show so much more of the in-world detail: Chat bubbles from talking dwarves would be a big benefit, especially if restricted to communication of information or anything tied to something happening in game. Seeing a dwarf running from an enemy just isn't the same without the exclamations of panic.

Title: Re: Isn't there just too much detail?
Post by: Shonai_Dweller on March 28, 2016, 07:41:08 pm

I don't think speech bubbles 'limited to things tied to the game' would be a good idea. Everything is tied to stuff happening in the game, isn't it?

"A goblin, how horrifying!" is just as important as "Plump helmets for dinner again?!", "I do so love mining", "Where is my brother? How lonesome I feel". Speech bubbles would be massive information overload.

Oh and don't forget to keep an eye on the arguments going on at the tavern, wouldn't want the visiting goblins to be convincing your dwarves of the worthlessness of hard work.

Wander round your fortress in adventurer and you'll see exactly what eveyone's talking about. Sure, some of isn't necessary (who cares about the local titans if you can't yet send out squads to handle them, right?). But since you don't have to worry about most of it unless you want to, isn't it better off screen (where it is right now)?