Bay 12 Games Forum

Well if you wanted to do it yourself, it looks like the tileset you're referring to has a 50% opacity layer under the actual tiles (which is pale brown for some reason?). I think with opacity that high it wouldn't play nice with background colours all the time, but other than that probably the only problem you would create is that all text would have boxes around it. Personally I don't like the look because everything is very clearly segmented into little game squares.

edit:

You could also just turn down your screen brightness. I have sensitive eyes so I altar my brightness to match the light level in the room.

I played nethack with ASCII for a couple years before I found out about Dwarf Fortress, so I was more comfortable with the graphics than most. That being said, when I telnet to nethack.alt.org I am playing with my nice terminal font; the default ASCII tileset in Dwarf Fortress is quite a step back from that. So I went onto the wiki and found a nice square tileset I liked and tweaked my colours while I was at it. All ASCII. The tileset I went with had diagonal wall corners, because it makes a lot more sense than right angles.

I wasn't totally happy with the tileset though, so I continually altered it, by just a few pixels each time, until I eventually got to what I have now. So now I have something that I feel delivers the visual information of the game in the best possible way, but in no small part because it's a way that I'm intensely familiar with; I don't doubt others find curses to be the best way for them, due to their familiarity with it.

On graphics: If you can cope with items and terrain features being represented by images of completely unrelated things, if you think that it's worth it to have grass that looks like grass and whatever else your graphical pack does? Well that's just fine. But it's simply not possible to convey the same amount of (unambiguous) visual information with a graphical pack as it is with ASCII, and for that reason I will never use one.

I don't use the default graphics because they're not very easy on the eyes. Dat contrast. I prefer Pheobus'.

Yeah, this is mostly due to the fact that the default colours are pulled straight from the HTML standard and are probably intended to be set against white. Modders have created much better colour schemes that are more in keeping with the theme of the game and won't make you go blind (if you're interested).

Not all tilesets are graphical. I personally think the curses tiles are the ugliest thing in the world; not only is the font bad, the glyphs aren't even square. But I would never play with graphics, they are far too limited in how much they can represent. I personally play with a heavily modified version of the Lord Dullard/Exponent tileset because my screen is a little on the small side, but if you can fit it on yours I would recommend an ASCII version of the Bisasam tileset (20x20, 16x16).

If you use a sexy ASCII tileset, the game will look a lot better than anything graphical due to the current 256-character limit.

Does it still work for DF2012 by any chance?

If so, could someone please upload it somewhere; I couldn't find any downloads for it which still work.

I can't be bothered actually reading the thread but please tell me someone has readouts from prospector. Otherwise people are just basing this argument on anecdotal evidence.

It's not down for me right now, but I've had it happen a number of times.

I'm currently playing in a freezing biome and I absolutely need to grow some aboveground crops. Is this at all possible?

I'll take Urist McRetard.