Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 116 117 [118] 119 120 ... 149

Author Topic: Future of the Fortress  (Read 382470 times)

Criperum

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1755 on: March 17, 2019, 08:03:26 am »

Will the steam version of the game have 3rd party utilities most people used to have like dfhack and dwarf therapist? I mean managing dwarfes and searching in most game windows provided by them is hard to overestimate. Or maybe the steam version will have the same functionality introduced?
Logged

therahedwig

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
    • wolthera.info
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1756 on: March 17, 2019, 08:24:36 am »

Probably not: these utilities are made by outsiders, so it would be a lot of paperwork to get them bundled legally without any confusion on who owns what that someone with a lawyer could take advantage of.
Logged
Stonesense Grim Dark 0.2 Alternate detailed and darker tiles for stonesense. Now with all ores!

Criperum

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1757 on: March 17, 2019, 08:29:08 am »

Then it'll be still very hard for steam players to come into the game.
Logged

therahedwig

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
    • wolthera.info
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1758 on: March 17, 2019, 09:45:28 am »

Really? I learned DF with a graphics pack, and only used therapist rarely. (And only used dfhack for stuff like stonesense)

EDIT: Looking back the main thing that stumbled me up and inspired me to find a tutorial was that I didn't understand you start with designating things first before you start building, I was so confused why I couldn't build things.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2019, 09:47:44 am by therahedwig »
Logged
Stonesense Grim Dark 0.2 Alternate detailed and darker tiles for stonesense. Now with all ores!

Egan_BW

  • Bay Watcher
  • How is that possible?! We have so many chairs!
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1759 on: March 17, 2019, 10:09:09 am »

I mean managing dwarfes and searching in most game windows provided by them is hard to overestimate.

Not really, I see people overestimate it all the time. Right now, for example~

Most new players would just be even more intimidated by a big spreadsheet showing all the dwarves and their skills and permissions and such. It's really not necessary or helpful until you're managing 200 dwarves and want them all to be maximally effective at building some big dumb megastructure.
Logged
Okay, so you've crafted for yourself a set of false, easily falsifiable beliefs about your current situation based off of preconceptions you have from watching too much anime. And now you're going to be mad at me because the reality of the situation does not align with your delusion of how it's supposed to be.



No, I just wish you'd told me.

PatrikLundell

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1760 on: March 17, 2019, 11:39:08 am »

Will the steam version of the game have 3rd party utilities most people used to have like dfhack and dwarf therapist? I mean managing dwarfes and searching in most game windows provided by them is hard to overestimate. Or maybe the steam version will have the same functionality introduced?
If I've understood the discussion correctly, the commercial and Classic versions should be sufficiently similar that tools made for one version would generally work with the other. I find it hard to see an LNP for the commercial versions, unless it would somehow locate the installed game and then wrap the utilities in with it, but it would probably still have to be distinct from the LNPs we have now. Ironically, the commercial version users may see more of a problem getting easy access to the tools than the Classic one, which probably isn't good from a commercial standpoint. It might be a good idea for Toady to discuss how external tools such as DT and DFHack based ones can be added/removed easily (and while I'm on the advice soap box, the Kitfox people might want to consider a "tutorial" consisting of a canned world and pre selected embark location with pre selected dorfs and equipment where the world is copied before start [to allow the tutorial to be started from scratch again]).
Logged

Furrnox

  • Escaped Lunatic
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1761 on: March 18, 2019, 05:42:34 am »

I think DF commercial will have a hard time without a tutorial tbh.
Logged

Criperum

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1762 on: March 18, 2019, 05:45:18 am »

If I've understood the discussion correctly, the commercial and Classic versions should be sufficiently similar that tools made for one version would generally work with the other. I find it hard to see an LNP for the commercial versions, unless it would somehow locate the installed game and then wrap the utilities in with it, but it would probably still have to be distinct from the LNPs we have now. Ironically, the commercial version users may see more of a problem getting easy access to the tools than the Classic one, which probably isn't good from a commercial standpoint. It might be a good idea for Toady to discuss how external tools such as DT and DFHack based ones can be added/removed easily (and while I'm on the advice soap box, the Kitfox people might want to consider a "tutorial" consisting of a canned world and pre selected embark location with pre selected dorfs and equipment where the world is copied before start [to allow the tutorial to be started from scratch again]).

May be it would be possible using steam workshop(i don't know exactly how it works and what it allows moddeders to do)?

I undestand it might be too early to ask but as we know steam takes 30% of money for themselves and itch.io has a variable percentage. So will those fees be the same on both platforms? I'm just curious which one to choose to be sure more money will go to Adams brothers.
Logged

Shonai_Dweller

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1763 on: March 18, 2019, 05:59:37 am »

Ah. Forget that comment. Deleted.
Logged

PatrikLundell

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1764 on: March 18, 2019, 07:41:31 am »

@Criperum: Don't forget that a donation is still the most effective way to support DF, as less is lost to the middle man. The actual question is very relevant for those who want the commercial version over the free + optional donation one for various reasons, though.
Logged

Criperum

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1765 on: March 18, 2019, 08:22:50 am »

Yeah. I'm donating on patreon for the long time. I'm just curious which platform to choose to get and to advise to my friends.
Logged

Dragonslayerelf

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1766 on: March 18, 2019, 09:42:31 am »

As Shonai_Dweller indicated, ArtemiusTheHuman's suggestions are mainly suggestions, and belong in the suggestions forum, where Toady will have a greater chance of acting on them (questions in this thread are read, answered, and forgotten [i.e. no particular action is taken after that], while suggestions are looked at from time to time).
1. ...dwarven ethics doesn't allow for slavery, and that presumably includes veiled versions of it, such as indenture, caste stratified societies, etc...

Bit late but not everything needs to fit into the context of just a dwarvish fort. With the wonderful mess that are raw edits, a lot of people like to play with races that aren't dwarves, and something like slavery would fit perfectly in with a goblin or even some kind of modded dark dwarf fort. Additionally, with an ethics change, a dwarven fort might be deemed in your headcanon to view goblins as subhuman and thus employ them in slave labour. Additionally, having played w/ a goblin fort, "slow learners" work like pets that can do basic labors (basically they only haul unless you assign them labors with Dwarf Therapist) but still have moods and can rampage, however, you can't really view their feelings or stressors, which makes them kinda buggy sometimes. Additionally, you can slaughter them still, which, while a good way to get rid of stark raving mad or melancholic trolls, is just weird on concept. Regardless, I don't think it should really be posed as something that should only work for dwarves, as I think I've heard it repeated that Toady intends to work on other races once dwarves are completely done (assumedly after 40,000 when he ascends to God Emperorship) which I, as an avid goblin player, am pleased by. However, even having the option of slavery/cannibalism/etc in raw edits is nice.

However, speaking of, are there any plans to release slavery & cannibalism with the villainy or maybe even the gods & myths update?
Logged

PatrikLundell

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1767 on: March 18, 2019, 11:43:19 am »

@Dragonslayerelf: Vanilla DF only supports dwarves currently, although modding can make other races more or less playable, but typically just "odd dorfs". I believe the current hard coded dwarven ethics is a temporary measure: the Myth & Magic arc(s) is intended to support generated races, so unless you would only be able to play fortress mode as dwarves in a world that supports dwarves (not e.g. a fully mundane one, that only sports humans), support for other races has to be provided at least to some extent (and I think the various site improvement efforts currently is a step towards that goal). Slavery/cannibalism, etc. may still have to wait, however, as those are issues that would fit right in with the Law & Custom arc.

Attempting to provide a temporary answer to the Toady question then: Slavery & cannibalism will most likely remain out of bounds of the fortress mode due to the strong ties to Law and Custom, and rather weak ones to villainy (slave trafficking makes little sense without an economy). My personal guess is that both issues will have to wait until Law & Custom, but there's always a risk/opportunity that it's needed for Myth & Magic generated race support.
Logged

Manveru Taurënér

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1768 on: March 18, 2019, 12:14:58 pm »

Relevant stoof from the FotF in march last year (will sort the linky bits out later, on Phone atm).

Quote from: DG
With minor modding the current game allows fort mode to be played with humans, goblins, elves and even kobolds. Presumably this hasn't made it into vanilla because they aren't as feature complete as dwarves and not yet differentiated enough. Is the work around the myth generator likely to change this? I assume some work will need to go into shoe-horning randomly generated high-magic-world races into fortress mode and am wondering if you think this will end up incorporating the original races as playable in vanilla at the same time or if they will wait for their own specific releases focused on the features you want present before making them playable?

It might be too much work to support them, and it would be pretty simple to ensure that one of the procgen'd races ticks enough of the fort mode necessities.  Mainly the digging part, since outdoor constructions are still clunky.  If we get to a point where an outdoor race would be fun to play, and has enough of its other bells and whistles respected, I'd be fine with that.  It just doesn't feel like we are quite there.  Overall though, I think procedural fort races will build a bit of that development pressure, the way things often work, since supporting their other quirks will be something that can be done more piecemeal without it feeling utterly broken...  and then suddenly I might realize or be reminded, "oh, human castle mode is basically ready" or something like that.  (naturally, the 17x17 sites wouldn't be supported due to memory concerns** -- another road into this is the scenario-related smaller work sites that everybody will have; "human lumber camp" is another possible path to playable humans.)

** (though without digging and with the map-rewrite, loading a 17x17 human embark suddenly becomes totally feasible, as the deep elevations which would normally blow-out memory and create an underground-life pathing nightmare could simply be ignored; though citizen path-finding would probably be slightly more costly as the map would be less compact -- that doesn't mean we'd be able to have all 10000 citizens of one of those human capitals loaded, but it does mean you could play a 200 person human 'town' with a small market and have the usual FPS problems, but no more than that)
« Last Edit: March 18, 2019, 12:54:41 pm by Manveru Taurënér »
Logged

therahedwig

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
    • wolthera.info
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1769 on: March 18, 2019, 12:54:16 pm »

*whispers something about slavery being a property law thing* Edit: No, Patrick already touched upon it. But yeah, even non-economy related, slavery is very much a law thing to even define what it and its limits is beyond 'people who enslave others are [ethical judgement]'.

Dunno about cannibalism though, might be a bigger candidate for myth and magic, what with the notion of a soul and some ideas about absorbing the strength of what/who you consume, etc.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2019, 12:58:35 pm by therahedwig »
Logged
Stonesense Grim Dark 0.2 Alternate detailed and darker tiles for stonesense. Now with all ores!
Pages: 1 ... 116 117 [118] 119 120 ... 149