Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 11

Author Topic: How is DF not technically doomed?  (Read 24079 times)

Orange Wizard

  • Bay Watcher
  • mou ii yo
    • View Profile
    • S M U G
Re: How is DF not technically doomed?
« Reply #60 on: February 22, 2016, 07:22:17 am »

Yeah, the dynamic world is basically the whole point of the game. It doesn't do much right now, but as development continues we'll be interacting with the world as a whole in very meaningful ways, and vice versa.
Logged
Please don't shitpost, it lowers the quality of discourse
Hard science is like a sword, and soft science is like fear. You can use both to equally powerful results, but even if your opponent disbelieve your stabs, they will still die.

Aachen

  • Bay Watcher
  • Wenzo Pilgrim cancels job: unstuck in time.
    • View Profile
Re: How is DF not technically doomed?
« Reply #61 on: February 22, 2016, 04:13:14 pm »

Doesn't anyone remember how Z levels killed this game?!
Logged
Quote from: Rithol Camus
There is but one truly serious philosophical problem and that is magma.

Quote from: Chinua Achebe
.... For Cliché is pauperized Ecstasy.

Putnam

  • Bay Watcher
  • DAT WIZARD
    • View Profile
Re: How is DF not technically doomed?
« Reply #62 on: February 22, 2016, 04:25:39 pm »

A entire other option is to remove some of the features designed over the years, like the dynamic world, in principle it is a very cool feature, but when playing a fort. Do one really care if the rest of the world is changing? As I remember it, that feature did cost something around 20% of the fps.

1. that's the point of the game

2. the activated world's impact on FPS is near-negligible and constant; it's completely and utterly ridiculous to think that it's related to FPS death, since, y'know, it's explicitly the exact part of the simulation that isn't directly affected by fortress activities.

Also, to add: Moore's law is dead. Can't rely on that anymore.

Untrustedlife

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
    • My Website
Re: How is DF not technically doomed?
« Reply #63 on: February 22, 2016, 05:54:24 pm »

Yeah, the dynamic world is basically the whole point of the game. It doesn't do much right now, but as development continues we'll be interacting with the world as a whole in very meaningful ways, and vice versa.

You can already interact really deeply with it in adventure mode, anyone suggesting to remove that feature clearly doesn't get the point of dwarf fortress.
Its been toady's goal the entire time and its finally in removing that would be indistinguishable from ruining the point of the game.

Its actually scary to think that someone wants it removed/thinks its a good idea,  its the point of dwarf fortress to effect the world and participate in history and world activation is a huge part of that.
removing that is a horrible step backward.
.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2016, 05:59:14 pm by Untrustedlife »
Logged
i LIKE LOVECRAFT
My website:
untrustedlife.com
Check out the open source simulation game I am developing!
Thrive

thvaz

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: How is DF not technically doomed?
« Reply #64 on: February 22, 2016, 06:06:17 pm »

Doesn't anyone remember how Z levels killed this game?!

Maybe my sarcasmmeter is broken, but you are right - doomsday people have been calling the end times of Dwarf Fortress since the old days.
Logged

NJW2000

  • Bay Watcher
  • [CONSUMES_VERMIN]
    • View Profile
Re: How is DF not technically doomed?
« Reply #65 on: February 22, 2016, 06:08:55 pm »

Slaves to Armok died when it went ASCII. People just can't accept that.


I wasn't actually born then, I suspect.
Logged
I'm not around much anymore. I'll still check PMs though.

therahedwig

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
    • wolthera.info
Re: How is DF not technically doomed?
« Reply #66 on: February 22, 2016, 06:40:51 pm »

Noes, noes gaiz, ur all sycopanties, don't u see?

Obviciously, teh gaem dat cals itzelf "generic fantasy world simulator" shuld not simmerlatte phantasie wurlds.

Id ys fur simmerlating suckybies. *nods sagely*.

Kirkegaard, the above is not particularly aimed at you despite what context may imply. I have seen more often that people say that DF is *anything but fantasy world simulator*, and often this is a case of people honing in on one bit they like.

Like others have implied, world gen doesn't do much damage.

The new trees, which came in the same release are a different story. Furthermore, there's a thread in dwarf mode about a fort of nearly 250 years where the author can confirm the biggest drain is still the large ammount of dwarves.

World activation may not seem much now, especially if you live for infinite sieges, but within the next two years, with artefacts getting more meaning and armies arriving for them specifically or starting scenarios, it'll be vital. Hence why everyone is so confused over your statement.
Logged
Stonesense Grim Dark 0.2 Alternate detailed and darker tiles for stonesense. Now with all ores!

Miuramir

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: How is DF not technically doomed?
« Reply #67 on: February 22, 2016, 08:18:24 pm »

Another thought I just had:

Toady's job is to create the best fantasy world generator and simulator.  Intel's job is to create a computer that can run it.  Right now, despite having over 100,000 employees, assets over $100 billion, and revenue over $55 billion... Intel is the one falling behind on their end of the process :)
Logged

TheBiggerFish

  • Bay Watcher
  • Somewhere around here.
    • View Profile
Re: How is DF not technically doomed?
« Reply #68 on: February 22, 2016, 08:21:53 pm »

Another thought I just had:

Toady's job is to create the best fantasy world generator and simulator.  Intel's job is to create a computer that can run it.  Right now, despite having over 100,000 employees, assets over $100 billion, and revenue over $55 billion... Intel is the one falling behind on their end of the process :)
Hah!  Hahahahaha!
Hah!
Yes!
Yessss!
Sig'd!
Logged
Sigtext

It has been determined that Trump is an average unladen swallow travelling northbound at his maximum sustainable speed of -3 Obama-cubits per second in the middle of a class 3 hurricane.

AzyWng

  • Bay Watcher
  • The brochure sure didn't mention any of this shit.
    • View Profile
Re: How is DF not technically doomed?
« Reply #69 on: February 22, 2016, 09:57:11 pm »

Another thought I just had:

Toady's job is to create the best fantasy world generator and simulator.  Intel's job is to create a computer that can run it.  Right now, despite having over 100,000 employees, assets over $100 billion, and revenue over $55 billion... Intel is the one falling behind on their end of the process :)

FUCKING SIGGED!
Logged

TheBiggerFish

  • Bay Watcher
  • Somewhere around here.
    • View Profile
Re: How is DF not technically doomed?
« Reply #70 on: February 22, 2016, 10:10:00 pm »

HEY!  I WAS THERE FIRST!  NO SIG THIEF!
Logged
Sigtext

It has been determined that Trump is an average unladen swallow travelling northbound at his maximum sustainable speed of -3 Obama-cubits per second in the middle of a class 3 hurricane.

funkydwarf

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: How is DF not technically doomed?
« Reply #71 on: February 22, 2016, 11:20:26 pm »

The facts:

1.it uses dev time to optimize. further devving (the other 57.94% of the game) will break most prior optimizations. Why waste all that devtime to optimize each microversion of this alpha when it will change?

2.Just cause it fun to play and works (mostly) doesn't mean its a "Release" ready 1.0 product. You get to play the alpha.(lucky you!)


these are easy to understand.  #1 in particular makes it to easy to see why Toady chooses the strategy of "optimizing once at the end" over "optimize every 10% or so"

It is a chosen strategy chosen by Toady.
People who press on insisting we will not be able to play DF in 2017 or even 2024, after learning fact #1,is trolling.

There is a version without world generation and big trees, its 34.11.  Its still available. The only thing missing is world gen and big trees...

added opinion: the cpu industry will be focusing on IPC(instructions per sec) again soon to now
Logged

tolkafox

  • Bay Watcher
  • Capitalism, ho!
    • View Profile
    • Phantasm
Re: How is DF not technically doomed?
« Reply #72 on: February 23, 2016, 12:17:03 am »

Ugh, just the title of this thread is enough to stir the grammar nazi within me.

The change logs are almost as entertaining as the game itself, therefore the game is not doomed as long as the change logs continue to bring spurs of spontaneous hilarity.

Coming up next: How is this thread not technically doomed?
Logged
It was a miracle of rare device, A sunny pleasure-dome with caves of ice!

Orange Wizard

  • Bay Watcher
  • mou ii yo
    • View Profile
    • S M U G
Re: How is DF not technically doomed?
« Reply #73 on: February 23, 2016, 01:02:36 am »

Coming up next: How is this thread not technically doomed?
Perpetual motion
Logged
Please don't shitpost, it lowers the quality of discourse
Hard science is like a sword, and soft science is like fear. You can use both to equally powerful results, but even if your opponent disbelieve your stabs, they will still die.

Putnam

  • Bay Watcher
  • DAT WIZARD
    • View Profile
Re: How is DF not technically doomed?
« Reply #74 on: February 23, 2016, 01:19:25 am »

(the other 57.94% of the game)

the third number in the version number refers to updates too small to add a percent since last percentage, not hundredths of percents. Next release is probably 0.42.07, but I'd hazard a guess that it's about halfway to 0.43.01. I had 0.42.01 pegged before release, and I had guessed that 0.40.01 would be somewhere between 0.38 and 0.42 and I figured 0.34 would be somewhere around 0.33-36, so I've been pretty good so far.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 11