3 ms·
> It would be a shame if people willing to give it a try would give it up due to the poor quality of the initial release of a new major version. I appreciate t
by incepted 11y ago
> It would be a shame if people willing to give it a try would give it up due to the poor quality of the initial release of a new major version.
I appreciate the intent but when, in the same message, you say:
> Dwarf Fortress is basically a perpetual beta with lots of major bugs as it is, but especially brand new major versions like this one usually have multiple game-breaking bugs, including crashes, corrupted saves, etc.
you are actively dissuading everyone from ever trying the game.
- saulrh 11y agoI think what he meant is that the game is usually at beta quality - which is to say, it has funky bugs sometimes but it's rare that it corrupts your saves or lights your computer on fire - so this "beta" release is actually closer to another piece of software's alpha level of quality. I'd call this release an alpha. Either pick up the previous release, which is solidly in stable-beta territory and is only not an RC because DF's features list is approximately as long as the equator, or wait a bit until this alpha reaches beta status again.
- CaptSpify 11y agoIs there a beta vs alpha scheme for the versions that would designate a good "starters" release?
- cobrophy 11y agoGo with the previous version before this release, 40.24 While getting a handle of the basics of the game you really won't miss out on any of the new features in the latest version. They're at a somewhat more advanced level and you'll be spending your time trying to figure out the menus and how to not die of starvation and thirst, and less concerned with what instrument bards should play.