Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 14

Author Topic: Decent game...but why no graphics?  (Read 10617 times)

Tormy

  • Bay Watcher
  • I shall not pass?
    • View Profile
Re: Decent game...but why no graphics?
« Reply #15 on: August 28, 2006, 06:09:00 pm »

quote:
Originally posted by Virtz:
<STRONG>It's also very problematic as to how things would be presented. I doubt anyone is able to fit a 7 headed beast like the hydra in a single tile. And I wouldn't like hydras to be presented as a normal dragon - a solution used in Nethack(which only causes more confusion) and the reason why I hate graphical Gearhead. Also, not sure about this, but there's supposebly a creature generator feature planned for the future. In order to properly present randomly generated creatures, DF would require procedural programming worthy of Will Wright's Spore or even better.

In the end, I like DF as it is and setting graphics as a priority would slow down development on the more important features like the ability to spit in someone's eyes. :P

Also, I'd like to see this majority craving for 2d tiles you're talking about. The majority I see here appears to be fine with ASCII. :S</STRONG>



Its very possible to add any kind of monsters to 1 tile. Check out www.wesnoth.org
Tile based very good looking strategy game.

Logged

DakaSha

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Decent game...but why no graphics?
« Reply #16 on: August 28, 2006, 06:32:00 pm »

dude your not the only one playing
Logged

Rollory

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Decent game...but why no graphics?
« Reply #17 on: August 28, 2006, 06:43:00 pm »

quote:
Originally posted by Tormy:
<STRONG>Actually he did. Read that weak ass complaint part of his moronic reply.
</STRONG>

I did read it.  He is absolutely correct.  There was no reason to bring up those things since they aren't central to questions of the game's development as-is, and the effect of bringing them up is exactly what he said: to present them as arguments while pretending you weren't doing so.  It's dishonest.  For you to respond by saying he's being offensive is even more dishonest - whether you're offended has nothing to do with whether it's true.

quote:
<STRONG>and they all agree on this part,</STRONG>

And other people care about their opinions, why?

Look, it doesn't matter what some random people like in a game.  It doesn't matter what _I_ like in a game.  What matters is what improvements can best enhance the game's strengths.  Graphics is not one such.

Good job making it clear that you have the substance as well as the appearance, too.

Logged

Reality_Unknown

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Decent game...but why no graphics?
« Reply #18 on: August 28, 2006, 06:57:00 pm »

Graphics would be nice, but i have no problem with the current one, and giving the opportunity between more gameplay and features or some weak graphics i would much prefer more coolness in the game.  oh and the complainer is a total jerk.
Logged

imsabbel

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Decent game...but why no graphics?
« Reply #19 on: August 28, 2006, 07:03:00 pm »

Well, actually this whole "roguelike LOLS circlejerk" going on in general (like in the SA and pennyarcade thread, which state to fuck of if you dislike the current "i through up on the screen" look) is a bit missplaced.

Simply because DF isnt a roguelike.
Its a fucking dungeon keeper clone, mixed with a bit of sim city and civilisation.

While in roguelikes, you have:
-letters for the monsters
-squares for walls
-10 or so ascii chars for different item types on the floor
-a strict LOS limiting was can be seen and thus clutter
-Limiting tilesnumber visible doesnt matter because of LOS

DF has
-letters for monsters (so far ok)
-complete overload in the symbol department (random clutter of engravings, furniture, items, goods, ect)
-no limiting LOS-> Screens of letter-soup. Especially in tighter fortresses
-25x80 "pixel" effective resolution that really hurt usability (because of limiting lists, menue space, ect, plus killing any kind of overview).

While i dont need icons for monsters, the whole "base" part should seriously getting revamped.

Logged

AlStar

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Decent game...but why no graphics?
« Reply #20 on: August 28, 2006, 07:19:00 pm »

quote:
Take a look at Wesnoth.

It might be worth noting that Wesnoth's graphics are the result of dozens of people working on just that - graphics. They're also way past the alpha stage of development.

DF is made up of two people. One of whom is coding so fast that he's spitting out a new version every couple of days.

Graphics of any kind take time to make - time that would be directly taken out of development of (IMO) much more interesting features.

Seriously, have you looked at the REQ list (not even counting the bloats)? He's planning some big stuff. I'd much rather he work on that then a graphic representation of a cat, a rock or any of the hundreds of other objects in this game already.

[ August 28, 2006: Message edited by: AlStar ]

Capntastic

  • Bay Watcher
  • Greetings, mortals!
    • View Profile
    • A review and literature weblog I never update
Re: Decent game...but why no graphics?
« Reply #21 on: August 28, 2006, 07:25:00 pm »

I personally think that tiles look horrid for roguelikes, because having an epic monster being represented by a symbol causes you to imagine what it looks like.   Having a tiny little sprite that looks goofy makes things look lame and take away from the atmosphere.

I don't think graphics would add anything to the gameplay or enjoyment of the game, and as such, shouldn't be asked of Toady- especially at this stage of production.

I have a strong dislike of tilesets for games originally designed in ASCII-ish, because I've never seen one that doesn't look absolutely lame.  I challenge you to prove me wrong on this point!

Logged

ghor

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Decent game...but why no graphics?
« Reply #22 on: August 28, 2006, 07:26:00 pm »

quote:
even a bad looking 2d sprite would be much better then this ASCII thing.

Disagree... so... hard. Also, am I the only one who thinks the unit sprites in Wesnoth clash horribly with the terrain? This is not what I think DF should look like.

So, add another "I'm perfectly happy with (quasi-)ASCII graphics" vote to the pile.

Logged

Mechanoid

  • Bay Watcher
  • [INTELLIGENT]
    • View Profile
Re: Decent game...but why no graphics?
« Reply #23 on: August 28, 2006, 07:31:00 pm »

No explanation should be required... Nor will any be given:

Logged
Quote from: Max White
"Have all the steel you want!", says Toady, "It won't save your ass this time!"

Citizen of Erl

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Decent game...but why no graphics?
« Reply #24 on: August 28, 2006, 07:34:00 pm »

I personally see no need for any sort of tiled graphics. Especially since I've never seen any sort of tiled graphics in an ASCII-based game that actually look good.

Besides, it's in alpha. We should let Toady finish making the game before we worry about things which are, essentially, finishing touches for a game designed like this.

Edit: Curse your making the same point so it looks like I'm parroting you, mechanoid!

[ August 28, 2006: Message edited by: Citizen of Erl ]

Logged

Mechanoid

  • Bay Watcher
  • [INTELLIGENT]
    • View Profile
Re: Decent game...but why no graphics?
« Reply #25 on: August 28, 2006, 07:54:00 pm »

I was being blunt. You were being precise.
Thus, no parroting.   ;)


And in all honesty i would love to see Dwarf Fortress in full 3D, sort of like Dungeon Keeper 2. The only problem is that this isn't being realistic.
1) Way too early.
2) I dont think Toady knows how to model
3) It'd be a terror to try and code, especially what Toady has planned for the basic text graphics the game has now. I mean, "Colored, Real-time lighting" is on the Dwarf Fortress list of things to do. Almost all the 3D games dont even have that.

That's another issue with 2D tiles; how are you going to do colored lighting? Imagine you create a ruby lantern to hang in a room. It not only casts varrying levels of light onto the walls and floor, but also colors the walls and floors a varrying red color. [Varrying light levels AND color levels between tiles...] Which spills out into the hallway when the door opens. 2D tile HELL.

[ August 28, 2006: Message edited by: Mechanoid ]

Logged
Quote from: Max White
"Have all the steel you want!", says Toady, "It won't save your ass this time!"

Kjoery

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Decent game...but why no graphics?
« Reply #26 on: August 28, 2006, 07:56:00 pm »

Also the 3d graphics would be ugly, because it takes a long, long time, to make them not-ugly
Logged

JT

  • Bay Watcher
  • Explosively Canadian
    • View Profile
    • http://www.jtgibson.ca/df/
Re: Decent game...but why no graphics?
« Reply #27 on: August 28, 2006, 07:59:00 pm »

My opinion is that if Dwarf Fortress ever gets graphics, it will instantly lose half of its charm.  I would be very pleased if DF always had IBM-extended characters, from alpha to omega.
Logged
"The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, 'You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done.'" --George Carlin

Arnos

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Decent game...but why no graphics?
« Reply #28 on: August 28, 2006, 08:04:00 pm »

I think that DF could do with a new tileset but I don't think even that's needed, I belive that even 2D tiles would increase the dev time a lot and I think we all agree that's a bad thing.
Logged

Maurog

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Decent game...but why no graphics?
« Reply #29 on: August 28, 2006, 11:41:00 pm »

What? Dwarf Fortress has no graphics?

I'm playing it for a week and didn't notice. Thank you for pointing it out, Tormy.

Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 14