Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Putnam]

except it, um, doesn't crash every three hours or so

happiness isn't abandoned, it's actually a new subsystem? from 2014?

Also, you're not the final arbiter on what the "pillars of its gameplay" are. You're not even the first, and if you think that anything that the last few updates haven't been assisting in the "pillars of its gameplay", then you don't even begin to know what they actually are.

[Celebrim42]

except it, um, doesn't crash every three hours or so

Yes. It. Does.  (Why would I lie about that?)

For example:

Faulting application name: Dwarf Fortress.exe, version: 0.0.0.0, time stamp: 0x57420c94
Faulting module name: ntdll.dll, version: 10.0.10586.306, time stamp: 0x571afb7f
Exception code: 0xc0000374
Fault offset: 0x000dc7c9
Faulting process id: 0x1100
Faulting application start time: 0x01d20d641e46bde2
Faulting application path: ###########################\PERIDE~1.03-\Dwarf Fortress 0.43.03\Dwarf Fortress.exe
Faulting module path: C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\ntdll.dll
Report Id: 1976382d-0353-406a-93f1-c965dc42e337
Faulting package full name:
Faulting package-relative application ID:

Unfortunately, the error logging system is so deficient, I can't even file a bug report to assist the developer in figuring out what's wrong.  As a developer, this sends up big time warning signs.

happiness isn't abandoned, it's actually a new subsystem? from 2014?

That abandons the system, in that dwarfs now never become unhappy and so all the subsystems and emergent behavior that depended on that never happen.  And as I said, a cursory examination of how the new system works shows that you can't tweak it to make it work.   It has some basic flaws as a simulation of how happiness works.  These flaws and those of the prior systems are more important to Dwarf Fortress lore than a working system would be, since the sort of macabre things that DF are famous for... lines of contradictory happy and sad statements linked together for example.

Also, you're not the final arbiter on what the "pillars of its gameplay" are.

You have a exploration, resource management, sandbox game with elements of fantasy roleplaying and you think I need to be an arbiter about the pillars of the gameplay?  The freaking menu system tells you want the intended pillars of the gameplay are.  It doesn't take a genius to figure that out.   Hey, look, I have a two military submenus up at the primary menu level... I wonder if that's intended to be a pillar of gameplay.  Look, at all the freaking crafting/construction options... I wonder if that is intended to be a pillar of gameplay.

[Putnam]

Why in the world do you think that any thought went into the UI?

[Celebrim42]

Why in the world do you think that any thought went into the UI?

Oh good grief, now you are making my point for me.

Look, as a point of fact, I don't think enough thought went into the UI.  The UI sucks, but not because it is a menu driven system.  Not because its ASCII and all based around essentially hot keys.  No it sucks, because it can't even be consistent about how it wants you to traverse that menu: +/-, up arrow/down arrow.  It changes without rhyme or reason.  All controls are contextual and each context has to be learned.  Knowledge of any other area of the menu not only doesn't necessarily help you navigate another area, but can be downright misleading.  The same concept can appear under different names in different parts of the UI - refined coal OR coke OR coal. 

And just as there is no consistency in the UI, there is absolutely no consistency in how different concepts are treated.  So, you smelt metal and form bars, which are then used to form objects, which can in turn be melted back into bars.  Fine.  But, you smelt sand into raw glass.... and it can only be used as a gem.  You can't melt it back down.  You can only melt sand into objects directly.  Why?  What game play advantage is there to treating the two objects differently?  Is the fact that you can create infinite iron by making an object and repeatedly melting it a bug, or intended gameplay?  Does it matter, since the gameplay is more defined by its bugs than by its intention or conception?

But, back on topic, gameplay is defined by what the game allows you to do.  The pillars of your gameplay are the systems that the player is expected to spend the most time engaged in.  A pillar of gameplay in Minecraft might be for example collection of resources.   Another pillar might be exploration.   In a first person shooter, the pillar of gameplay might be tactical reflex based squad combat.  So, for example, if you implement a bunch of different skills for the dwarves and then have a system where dwarves gain XP and then become more proficient in these skills, then training up your dwarves becomes a pillar of the gameplay by definition.   I'm not defining that as a pillar of gameplay.  It just bloody well is. 

[Putnam]

Why in the world do you think that any thought went into the UI?

Oh good grief, now you are making my point for me.

No, you can't base a point on intent in design then say that I'm agreeing with you when I say that no such intent exists.

But, back on topic, gameplay is defined by what the game allows you to do.  The pillars of your gameplay are the systems that the player is expected to spend the most time engaged in.  A pillar of gameplay in Minecraft might be for example collection of resources.   Another pillar might be exploration.   In a first person shooter, the pillar of gameplay might be tactical reflex based squad combat.  So, for example, if you implement a bunch of different skills for the dwarves and then have a system where dwarves gain XP and then become more proficient in these skills, then training up your dwarves becomes a pillar of the gameplay by definition.   I'm not defining that as a pillar of gameplay.  It just bloody well is. 

This assumes a game that actually has completed gameplay.

[Deboche]

So is this actually a thread moping about the current state of DF in general? Did you check the frontpage where it says:

0.43.05

That means the game is 43% done. You'd be lucky to play for 3 hours without a crash and without becoming completely bored with the limited features in any other game that's 43% done. And for years I've played DF for hours and hours without crashes except immediately after a new version comes out.

The pillars of the game are pretty tall and sturdy already in my view. Stories sometimes get quite intricate, the fortress simulation is challenging, unpredictable and fun - in both senses of the word - and the freedom and scope of what you can do are unparalleled.

As for crash reports being a bad sign for a developer like you, it doesn't make sense. Have you seen the bug report page? Are you aware of the back and forth that goes on when a new version comes out where Toady fixes all the new crashes and bugs that he can and even adds some last minute suggestions? This is pretty much the best experience I've had with a developing game.

[Bumber]

except it, um, doesn't crash every three hours or so

Yes. It. Does.  (Why would I lie about that?)

Are you playing vanilla? A large majority of the crashes I've heard about are from people using TWBT (a DFHack plug-in.) Some crashes also happening on the Linux version.

If you're playing on one of the latest two versions, they use a new compiler. Lots of opportunity for issues there.

So, you smelt metal and form bars, which are then used to form objects, which can in turn be melted back into bars.  Fine.  But, you smelt sand into raw glass.... and it can only be used as a gem.  You can't melt it back down.  You can only melt sand into objects directly. Why?

It might need to be a powder to heat properly. It's generally made directly from sand IRL.

[Libash_Thunderhead]

Maybe wild animals and migrants can act similar?
I mean, they both should be more random or follow certain patterns.
For example, you don't kill off one group of camels just to let another group spawn in their places. Some animals also migrate, and you won't see them during certain seasons.

[Celebrim42]

]It might need to be a powder to heat properly. It's generally made directly from sand IRL.

Glass is the consummate recyclable material.  Glass makers recycle their broken pieces all the time.  Although you may not be old enough to remember when most containers in real life were glass, glass is pretty much the material that started the recycling movement. 

Moreover, from a realism perspective bars of glass were one of the original commodities that drove long distance trade.  People didn't trade sand.  Areas with sand that was good for glass production (that is, it made particularly beautiful, unusual or attractive glass - often with vivid colors) produced standardized glass 'bars' (actually more like thick disks) and traded them to other region for 'hides' of copper, jars of olive oil, and other standard commodities. 

So no, it really doesn't make much sense from a game play perspective that glass industry doesn't or can't produce bars, or that sand but not bars are available for trade.  My guess is that its a technical artifact of the implementation of glass that has kind of hung around without a lot of examination.

[Celebrim42]

Maybe wild animals and migrants can act similar?

In a sense.  I've complained elsewhere that the way animals in the game behave is at the same time obviously random and yet behaves according to rigid rules that makes it seem our little "100 acre wood" snapshot is the whole of the world.  They point is that a correct implementation will necessarily be random because simulating the whole world is impossible, as witness just how the engine chugs and puffs when you have just a few hundred dwarfs around "standing in" for the 10's of thousands of dwarves you might expect in a place like Moria or Erebor.  But this randomness if done well will create the illusion of arising from the larger simulated space.

Right now we have randomness that doesn't even create the illusion of a simulation.  Some of my critics are acting like at some point something like the methodology I outline will be unnecessary, because the whole simulated world will be well.... simulated.  But it doesn't take much reflection to figure out that is never going to happen.

If you are interested in this sort of thing, I encourage you to read up on creating AI for video games.  Humans are predisposed to imagine that any organized behavior they observe or apparently organized behavior they observe stems from mental behavior similar to their own mind.   They therefore develop a theory of the mind behind this behavior.  Game designers can leverage that behavior to create the illusion of intelligence where in fact something more rudimentary is going on.   In fact, Dwarf Fortress is really all about this, generating behaviors algorithmically that when observed trick the player into believing there is more going on than there is, and ultimately creating empathy for the dwarf characters.  So it's rather odd to see the same idea not really extended to the immigration system.

[Bumber]

Glass is the consummate recyclable material.  Glass makers recycle their broken pieces all the time.  Although you may not be old enough to remember when most containers in real life were glass, glass is pretty much the material that started the recycling movement.

Wikipedia says it gets crushed into cullet first, which sounds like a labor-intensive task. Probably needs an intermediate step at a millstone/quern.

Moreover, from a realism perspective bars of glass were one of the original commodities that drove long distance trade.  People didn't trade sand.  Areas with sand that was good for glass production (that is, it made particularly beautiful, unusual or attractive glass - often with vivid colors) produced standardized glass 'bars' (actually more like thick disks) and traded them to other region for 'hides' of copper, jars of olive oil, and other standard commodities.

So it would seem.

So no, it really doesn't make much sense from a game play perspective that glass industry doesn't or can't produce bars, or that sand but not bars are available for trade.  My guess is that its a technical artifact of the implementation of glass that has kind of hung around without a lot of examination.

Could just be an oversight due to time constraints. We can't burn clothes or wood items into ash. Ore furniture and blocks can't be melted. Furniture from glass blocks would probably add a bunch of reactions, since it's not desirable to replace the direct sand reactions. (Hopefully the reactions system will be overhauled at some point, now that we have job details.)

[Celebrim42]

Wikipedia says it gets crushed into cullet first[/url], which sounds like a labor-intensive task. Probably needs an intermediate step at a millstone/quern.

While modern cullet is probably ground mechanically to ensure uniformity for industrial production methods, historically cullet was just broken or scrap glass that was produced incidentally as objects broke during the glass blowing process.  You just swept it up, and put it back in the furnace. 

[Evans]

This is because talented individuals are drawn by the general advantages of living in a more desirable site equally with everyone else as they automatically enjoy those advantages even if additional privileges/influence are in question.  A talented individual will migrate along the lines of everybody else even if due to the size of the site he is moving too he has no prospects of improving his actual social standing by doing so.

Well, human population and dwarven/elven/kobold/whatever might differ in why they do migrate to smaller sites.
Come to think of it:
- elves would come to help grow the trees and protect the site. Think of druid migrating with a bag of seeds
- kobolds simply move from overcrowded areas to increase in numbers and conquer the world
- orcs for the same reasons
- as for dwarves, when I think about it, if you are a legendary mason in 200 y old fortress that has been build and "set in stone" (both literally and figuratively speaking) you have to do but fix the walls occasionally. Same with the miners. So moving to a new construction site makes a lot of sense - builder are needed there for the glory of dawrfkind, I am a builder bored to HFS at capitol, so why not go to help and for some extra thrill?

For the humans historical reason would apply. I long to see when the new system will be finally implemented. By that time quantum processors might be already on the market, so no worrying about FPS hit.

[expwnent]

I agree that dwarves are too easy to get your hands on and that can create balance issues. "Ruins the game" is a bit strong, but hyperbole is to be expected on the internet. Posting to watch.

[GoblinCookie]

There are more things that are broken to the point of being fatally flawed than there are things that actually work.   The gameplay as it exists is more defined by the emergent properties of its bugs, broken systems, and inattention to detail than it is by its design.  Like for example, its the only game I know of where experienced players have to steer their gameplay away from activities that would break the game engine, and yet whose design is built around those very activities.   It's the only game I know where there are more abandoned subsystems - happiness, economy, contaminants, etc. - than there are working subsystems.  It's the only game I know that lavishes more attention on things that have no functional impact on the game than it does on the actual pillars of its gameplay.  It's kind of interesting in the same way that a messenger RNA mutates until it reaches the limits of where it can still fulfill its function as a molecule, but never any further, and thus is defined by its accumulated baggage.  But as a game system, right now things are a brilliant train wreck. 

Brilliant enough I sent him money to continue his dream, but a train wreck nonetheless.

Maybe he'll be able to use that money to produce a game that doesn't crash every three hours or so.

Seriously, I enjoyed playing this game but how is it possible that anyone could actually have played this game and came away with the idea that it works, that it has ever worked, or that it ever will 'work' - least of all if they have an actual degree in Computer Science and game design credentials.   This in the industry is called a 'Fantasy Heartbreaker', and like all fantasy heartbreakers it is a thing of aching stunning beauty and a source of inspiration, and a terrible tragedy at the same time.  This did not start as any attempt to put down DF but as a heartfelt and honest suggestion to improve one area, but since you have insisted on throwing your chips down on the idea that this game is without flaw and criticism is inappropriate - I call.

I think that you have a skewed idea of what you mean by 'pillars of gameplay'.  This thread mystifies me since for an incomplete game immigration is basically a fully functional system that works very well, even down to getting to the 'right' dwarves for your present economic circumstances.  All that is really missing is some consideration of how dangerous your fortress is as well as how rich it is and the ability of unhappy dwarves to leave your fortress (emigrate). 

Well, human population and dwarven/elven/kobold/whatever might differ in why they do migrate to smaller sites.
Come to think of it:
- elves would come to help grow the trees and protect the site. Think of druid migrating with a bag of seeds
- kobolds simply move from overcrowded areas to increase in numbers and conquer the world
- orcs for the same reasons
- as for dwarves, when I think about it, if you are a legendary mason in 200 y old fortress that has been build and "set in stone" (both literally and figuratively speaking) you have to do but fix the walls occasionally. Same with the miners. So moving to a new construction site makes a lot of sense - builder are needed there for the glory of dawrfkind, I am a builder bored to HFS at capitol, so why not go to help and for some extra thrill?

For the humans historical reason would apply. I long to see when the new system will be finally implemented. By that time quantum processors might be already on the market, so no worrying about FPS hit.

I do not see why it has to be done directly by race, can it not be done directly by personality/values/profession on an individual basis?

I agree that dwarves are too easy to get your hands on and that can create balance issues. "Ruins the game" is a bit strong, but hyperbole is to be expected on the internet. Posting to watch.

The fact that your fortress is a people magnet regardless of how badly you play the game and how high the death rate is a little easy on the player but hardly ruining the game.  The dangerousness of your fortress is a missing mechanic, one that would add something to the game but there are many such mechanics.