9 ms·

Dwarf Fortress is a developer game. Last I checked, you need mods to get any graphics beyond basic ascii characters. Practically everything is a keyboard shortc

by dexwiz 10y ago

Dwarf Fortress is a developer game. Last I checked, you need mods to get any graphics beyond basic ascii characters. Practically everything is a keyboard shortcut that needs to be memorized. It makes the player feel like they're an operator from the Matrix trilogy. It's interesting that by completely ignoring UI/UX the developers (2 brothers) have managed to create one of the most in depth worlds imaginable. This makes it completely unaccessible to the wider world, but beloved by the core audience and respected by any nerd that tried to read through a tutorial. It's found success in being the antithesis of a AAA game, which is usually beautiful but shallow. I wonder if there could ever be another Dwarf fortress? Or if the target audience is too small to support another game.

nathas 10y ago
NetHack springs to mind.
- crooked-v 10y ago
  Nethack's menus and extended commands are much better thought-out and consistent than DF's equivalents.
  - philsnow 10y ago
    I would say that Nethack's are only "better thought-out", not "much better thought-out": Nethack was my first roguelike, 20+ years ago. A year or two ago I played Brogue, and realized just how crufty Nethack is. Let me see if I can remember all the item-specific commands, just from muscle memory. 'w' is for wielding weapons, to unwield you 'w' '-'. For armor, 'W' puts it on, 'T' takes it off. For rings/amulets, 'P' puts it on, 'R' takes it off. For missile weapons, 't' is for throw, 'f' is for fire (be sure you select something to be in your quiver with 'Q' first!). potions are quaffed with 'q', scrolls and spellbooks are read with 'r', wands are zapped with 'z', spells are cast with 'Z', food is eaten with 'e', tools (like candles etc) are applied with 'a'. In Brogue, every kind of equipment is equipped with 'e' and removed with 'r'. Every item that has an effect is invoked with 'a'. There are no spells; instead of memorizing spells you find staves that you then 'a', and they occupy space in your inventory just like a weapon. If you like roguelikes and haven't played Brogue, give it a shot. Also, take a read through nethack's source and Brogue's source, and you'll see that the cleanliness of Brogue's design is reflected in its code.
    - chongli 10y ago
      It's clear you've played enough NetHack that I don't have to tell you this stuff, but for anyone who hasn't played it: Brogue may be a lot simpler (I love both games) but NetHack lets you do tons of non standard things such as wearing a towel vs wiping your face with it vs wielding it as a weapon. You can wield rings as weapons, throw pieces of armor, dip objects into potions, engrave with wands, wield, throw, or eat cream pies... There's even a TV tropes page about it [0]! [0] http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DevelopersForesight?from=Main.TheDevTeamThinksOfEverything http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DevelopersForesig...
toxican 10y ago
While I've never managed to last longer than 5 minutes with the game, I am appreciative of it for inspiring a new era of management sim type games like Banished, Rim World, Gnomoria, etc.
- scrollaway 10y ago
  Try out Factorio! I bet most of the HN audience would love that game. Great factory simulation, moddable in Lua, replays, super friendly and transparent indie team behind it. Warning: Do not purchase Factorio if you have other plans.
  - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
    From what I can tell, Factorio is just top-down modded Minecraft, with less of a community. So I'd go for MC over FIO. But I haven't played FIO, so maybe I'm nuts. Anyways, if you like either game, try literally every game Zachtronics has ever made.
    - wyager 10y ago
      The entirety of factorio is centered around automated combat and production. Even with all automation mods I'm aware of, minecraft pales in comparison. I don't think minecraft's engine could even handle the number of concurrent actors that factorio does. When I used to play minecraft, you couldn't make complicated redstone devices on big multiplayer servers because the engine couldn't afford to simulate chunks that weren't occupied by players. Factorio simulates the entire map, all the time. It's heavily optimized for thousands of concurrent actors.
      - scrollaway 10y ago
        Oh my god and the optimization in Factorio is seriously impressive. They have an excellent blog and often post technical details, it's a real treat to read.
        10y ago
qwertyuiop924 10y ago
Dwarf Fortress fills its niche very well, to the point that anything that tries to make the same tradeoffs (extreme depth at the cost of accessability) in the same arena will inevitably be compared to DF unfavorably. But I will argue that DF has a cousin in a game that is comically far outside of its arena: Quake, and the Quake family tree in general. Both have a devoted audience that sticks with the games despite their extreme age and poor graphics. But more importantly - by accident more than by design - Quake has a ridiculous depth (both in mechanics and strategy) at the cost of exteme mechanical complexity (Just look at what you have to do to get the RA on Aerowalk). If you're looking for Dwarf Fortress lite, I'd suggest taking a look at games by Paradox Interactive, which have a similar reputation.
- pavel_lishin 10y ago
  I think that Kerbal Space Program scratches this particular itch better than a straight FPS.
  - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
    Like I said, I was aiming for a game that had similar depth/complexity tradeoffs to DF, but which wasn't situated in the simulation/sandbox genre, where all comers have to be compared to DF, and most don't measure up. Given, KSP doesn't strictly compete with DF...
- Impossible 10y ago
  That comparison is at best a stretch. It makes sense if you're young, but at the time of release Quake was the one of the most graphically and technologically advanced games available. One of the first truly modern FPS games, one of the first fully 3D texture mapped games, one of the first real-time action games to be widely played on the internet, one of the first to take advantage of 3D acceleration, etc. At release Dwarf Fortress was talked about in the exact same way it is talked about today... The mechanical depth you're talking about is a lot less like the depth people talk about when talking about Dwarf Fortress simulation complexity, and closer to emergent complexity of found in any good multiplayer video game. If you're talking about the Quake family tree, some of the most played current day first person shooters (CS:GO, COD, TF2) are direct ancestors of Quake, sharing some of Quake's source code. I have a ton of respect for Quake, its movement mechanics and its influence, but I don't really get the comparison.
predakanga 10y ago
Depends on what you mean by "Dwarf fortress", I suppose - there have been a great many DF-likes, the current darling being Rimworld, and more are definitely in the pipeline (keep an eye out for Klei Entertainment's Oxygen Not Included, which tries to incorporate the "losing is fun" aspect). Edit: Klei Software -> Klei Entertainment
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago
  Klei? Heh. I didn't see them making those sorts of games. Loved MotN, though, so I might give it a go.
  - scrollaway 10y ago
    Klei is one of my favourite studios. They are behind or have been involved in tons of great stuff. Mark of the Ninja, Don't Starve, great stuff indeed.
    - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
      I know. MotN is the game that got me into the stealth genre. Then I started playing Thief: The Dark Project. I still haven't beaten the first level of that... :-(
  - pavel_lishin 10y ago
    Don't Starve is definitely in the "losing is fun" genre.
    - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
      Wait, that was Klei? ...I need to start keeping tabs on those guys, like I do with Yacht Club, Supergiant, and Zachtronics.
VonGuard 10y ago
I would not quite call it a developer game, just more like a very involved and deep simulation. The barrier to new players is steep, but there are lots of easy-to-use third party tools to make the game more friendly [1]. It's certainly an extremely daunting game, and the interface is ridiculous and makes no sense. Like anything worth doing, it takes practice. If you're too intimidated by Dwarf Fortress, try RimWorld [2]. It's the same idea, but with a GUI. And if you really want to learn to play Dwarf Fortress, the Lazy Newbs pack linked to below is a great way to start. I'd recommend turning off invasions and aquifers in the opening menu. Other than that, there are plenty of how-to videos and wikis out there. I won't favor one with a link. Google can help with that. There will never be another game quite like Dwarf Fortress. But there will be a lot of games that learn from it and expand on its ideals. Tarn and Zack are incredible people, and if you send them a donation, they will mail you a hand-drawn image of a dwarf doing whatever you ask.[3] [1] http://lazynewbpack.com/ http://lazynewbpack.com/ [2] https://rimworldgame.com/ https://rimworldgame.com/ [3] http://www.bay12games.com/support.html http://www.bay12games.com/support.html
- ethbro 10y ago
  DISCLAIMER: Do not turn off aquifers. It will make your digging far less Fun.
  - outworlder 10y ago
    Did you mean !FUN! ?
- toomanybeersies 10y ago
  I donated to them a few years back and got a drawing in the mail from them. Not sure where it went, I should try finding it, it's a pretty cool gesture from them.
- dalore 10y ago
  Turn off invasions and aquifers? But losing is fun! http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/DF2014:Losing http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/DF2014:Losing
- 10y ago
VLM 10y ago
Extremely heavily modified minecraft (the way I like it) is a thing. If you enjoy somewhat non-intuitive UI in a minecraft UI setting, try recent versions of the blood magic mod for minecraft. Its essentially unplayable without a web browser and google on a second monitor, but is a cool design and worth the effort. Also like DF its a bit grindy. And it grows on people such that people tend to really like it, warts and all.
hota_mazi 10y ago
> Practically everything is a keyboard shortcut that needs to be memorized. That's not true: most menus are displayed prominently next to their keyboard shortcut, as you can see from the screenshots in that very article. You can also simply use the arrows to pick the menu you want. There's very little memorization required, the effort is learning how the interactions work and how they affect the game.
kjs3 10y ago
I wonder if there could ever be another Dwarf fortress? Nethack would like to have a word with you...
cryoshon 10y ago
>It's found success in being the antithesis of a AAA game yes! you have crystallized my reasons for playing df into a simple phrase. DF is 100% depth, and 0% fluff. all of the pieces matter, and there's about a bajillion of them, if you care to look.
joemi 10y ago
I wouldn't say the UI/UX has been completely ignored. In fact, to a large extent I'd say it's been quite deliberately designed. The lack of "graphics" does not necessarily lessen a game, especially one like this (or like less complicated roguelikes). I've been playing roguelikes for years (decades?) and I think the text visuals are actually better than any tile visuals I've ever tried (and I've tried a lot of tilesets for the various games I've played). As long as you know what the symbols mean, there's less ambiguity about what something is (especially at higher resolutions). Textual interfaces might not be great for a FPS, but at least to me, they're actually ideal for games like DF. Same for the keyboard interfaces. To me, the roguelike and DF style UI/UX are kind of like vim/emacs and "easier" or "prettier" game UI/UX are like MS Word. Both server their purposes well, but one is designed to be extremely powerful but it has a steep learning curve, while the other is designed to be easier for new users but the power usage can be more obscured or entirely non-existent. It's not a perfect analogy, of course, but it's my take on it.
- omni 10y ago
  > In fact, to a large extent I'd say it's been quite deliberately designed. I'm curious whether you actually read the article and have any thoughts on the menu within. Seemed horrible to me as an outside observer.
  - joemi 10y ago
    Didn't read the article but I've played the game. As I mentioned, I've been playing roguelikes for a long time, and I think that definitely has to do with my lack of hatred for the UI.
    - zzalpha 10y ago
      If you've played the game, read the article. Dwarf Fortress is like owning an incredibly ugly dog. Everyone knows it's ugly. You can even laugh at how ridiculous it is. But you can still love it all the same.
- Obi_Juan_Kenobi 10y ago
ouid 10y ago
you don't need mods, pretty sure the game ships with additional spritesheets, and replacing them is very easy. Though the ascii art is truly beautiful.
digi_owl 10y ago
> It's found success in being the antithesis of a AAA game, which is usually beautiful but shallow. Funny i should come across this claim, as reading the ebook collection of the filfre.net blog i came across a similar notion from Richard Garriott of all people. http://www.filfre.net/2015/07/the-14-deadly-sins-of-graphic-adventure-design/ http://www.filfre.net/2015/07/the-14-deadly-sins-of-graphic-... "Each time you get one of those major technology influxes, the quality of the graphics goes way up but the gameplay goes back to the simplest again because the bells and whistles have become so much cooler that you don’t need any depth. However, to compete with that [technologically pioneering title] you have to add depth, and to compete with that you have to add more depth, etc., until the next big technological advancement, when everything resets again back to that lowest common denominator of gameplay." And i think we can see this also in how over the years the sound and graphics staff of a games company has ballooned, while the number of programmers have remained largely the same.

by dexwiz 10y ago

nathas 10y ago

NetHack springs to mind.

crooked-v 10y ago
Nethack's menus and extended commands are much better thought-out and consistent than DF's equivalents.
- philsnow 10y ago
  I would say that Nethack's are only "better thought-out", not "much better thought-out": Nethack was my first roguelike, 20+ years ago. A year or two ago I played Brogue, and realized just how crufty Nethack is. Let me see if I can remember all the item-specific commands, just from muscle memory. 'w' is for wielding weapons, to unwield you 'w' '-'. For armor, 'W' puts it on, 'T' takes it off. For rings/amulets, 'P' puts it on, 'R' takes it off. For missile weapons, 't' is for throw, 'f' is for fire (be sure you select something to be in your quiver with 'Q' first!). potions are quaffed with 'q', scrolls and spellbooks are read with 'r', wands are zapped with 'z', spells are cast with 'Z', food is eaten with 'e', tools (like candles etc) are applied with 'a'. In Brogue, every kind of equipment is equipped with 'e' and removed with 'r'. Every item that has an effect is invoked with 'a'. There are no spells; instead of memorizing spells you find staves that you then 'a', and they occupy space in your inventory just like a weapon. If you like roguelikes and haven't played Brogue, give it a shot. Also, take a read through nethack's source and Brogue's source, and you'll see that the cleanliness of Brogue's design is reflected in its code.
  - chongli 10y ago
    It's clear you've played enough NetHack that I don't have to tell you this stuff, but for anyone who hasn't played it: Brogue may be a lot simpler (I love both games) but NetHack lets you do tons of non standard things such as wearing a towel vs wiping your face with it vs wielding it as a weapon. You can wield rings as weapons, throw pieces of armor, dip objects into potions, engrave with wands, wield, throw, or eat cream pies... There's even a TV tropes page about it [0]! [0] http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DevelopersForesight?from=Main.TheDevTeamThinksOfEverything http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DevelopersForesig...

toxican 10y ago

While I've never managed to last longer than 5 minutes with the game, I am appreciative of it for inspiring a new era of management sim type games like Banished, Rim World, Gnomoria, etc.

scrollaway 10y ago
Try out Factorio! I bet most of the HN audience would love that game. Great factory simulation, moddable in Lua, replays, super friendly and transparent indie team behind it. Warning: Do not purchase Factorio if you have other plans.
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago
  From what I can tell, Factorio is just top-down modded Minecraft, with less of a community. So I'd go for MC over FIO. But I haven't played FIO, so maybe I'm nuts. Anyways, if you like either game, try literally every game Zachtronics has ever made.
  - wyager 10y ago
    The entirety of factorio is centered around automated combat and production. Even with all automation mods I'm aware of, minecraft pales in comparison. I don't think minecraft's engine could even handle the number of concurrent actors that factorio does. When I used to play minecraft, you couldn't make complicated redstone devices on big multiplayer servers because the engine couldn't afford to simulate chunks that weren't occupied by players. Factorio simulates the entire map, all the time. It's heavily optimized for thousands of concurrent actors.
    - scrollaway 10y ago
      Oh my god and the optimization in Factorio is seriously impressive. They have an excellent blog and often post technical details, it's a real treat to read.
      - 10y ago

qwertyuiop924 10y ago

Dwarf Fortress fills its niche very well, to the point that anything that tries to make the same tradeoffs (extreme depth at the cost of accessability) in the same arena will inevitably be compared to DF unfavorably. But I will argue that DF has a cousin in a game that is comically far outside of its arena: Quake, and the Quake family tree in general. Both have a devoted audience that sticks with the games despite their extreme age and poor graphics. But more importantly - by accident more than by design - Quake has a ridiculous depth (both in mechanics and strategy) at the cost of exteme mechanical complexity (Just look at what you have to do to get the RA on Aerowalk). If you're looking for Dwarf Fortress lite, I'd suggest taking a look at games by Paradox Interactive, which have a similar reputation.

pavel_lishin 10y ago
I think that Kerbal Space Program scratches this particular itch better than a straight FPS.
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago
  Like I said, I was aiming for a game that had similar depth/complexity tradeoffs to DF, but which wasn't situated in the simulation/sandbox genre, where all comers have to be compared to DF, and most don't measure up. Given, KSP doesn't strictly compete with DF...
Impossible 10y ago
That comparison is at best a stretch. It makes sense if you're young, but at the time of release Quake was the one of the most graphically and technologically advanced games available. One of the first truly modern FPS games, one of the first fully 3D texture mapped games, one of the first real-time action games to be widely played on the internet, one of the first to take advantage of 3D acceleration, etc. At release Dwarf Fortress was talked about in the exact same way it is talked about today... The mechanical depth you're talking about is a lot less like the depth people talk about when talking about Dwarf Fortress simulation complexity, and closer to emergent complexity of found in any good multiplayer video game. If you're talking about the Quake family tree, some of the most played current day first person shooters (CS:GO, COD, TF2) are direct ancestors of Quake, sharing some of Quake's source code. I have a ton of respect for Quake, its movement mechanics and its influence, but I don't really get the comparison.

predakanga 10y ago

Depends on what you mean by "Dwarf fortress", I suppose - there have been a great many DF-likes, the current darling being Rimworld, and more are definitely in the pipeline (keep an eye out for Klei Entertainment's Oxygen Not Included, which tries to incorporate the "losing is fun" aspect). Edit: Klei Software -> Klei Entertainment

qwertyuiop924 10y ago
Klei? Heh. I didn't see them making those sorts of games. Loved MotN, though, so I might give it a go.
- scrollaway 10y ago
  Klei is one of my favourite studios. They are behind or have been involved in tons of great stuff. Mark of the Ninja, Don't Starve, great stuff indeed.
  - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
    I know. MotN is the game that got me into the stealth genre. Then I started playing Thief: The Dark Project. I still haven't beaten the first level of that... :-(
- pavel_lishin 10y ago
  Don't Starve is definitely in the "losing is fun" genre.
  - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
    Wait, that was Klei? ...I need to start keeping tabs on those guys, like I do with Yacht Club, Supergiant, and Zachtronics.

VonGuard 10y ago

I would not quite call it a developer game, just more like a very involved and deep simulation. The barrier to new players is steep, but there are lots of easy-to-use third party tools to make the game more friendly [1]. It's certainly an extremely daunting game, and the interface is ridiculous and makes no sense. Like anything worth doing, it takes practice. If you're too intimidated by Dwarf Fortress, try RimWorld [2]. It's the same idea, but with a GUI. And if you really want to learn to play Dwarf Fortress, the Lazy Newbs pack linked to below is a great way to start. I'd recommend turning off invasions and aquifers in the opening menu. Other than that, there are plenty of how-to videos and wikis out there. I won't favor one with a link. Google can help with that. There will never be another game quite like Dwarf Fortress. But there will be a lot of games that learn from it and expand on its ideals. Tarn and Zack are incredible people, and if you send them a donation, they will mail you a hand-drawn image of a dwarf doing whatever you ask.[3] [1] http://lazynewbpack.com/ http://lazynewbpack.com/ [2] https://rimworldgame.com/ https://rimworldgame.com/ [3] http://www.bay12games.com/support.html http://www.bay12games.com/support.html

ethbro 10y ago
DISCLAIMER: Do not turn off aquifers. It will make your digging far less Fun.
- outworlder 10y ago
  Did you mean !FUN! ?
toomanybeersies 10y ago
I donated to them a few years back and got a drawing in the mail from them. Not sure where it went, I should try finding it, it's a pretty cool gesture from them.
dalore 10y ago
Turn off invasions and aquifers? But losing is fun! http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/DF2014:Losing http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/DF2014:Losing
10y ago

VLM 10y ago

Extremely heavily modified minecraft (the way I like it) is a thing. If you enjoy somewhat non-intuitive UI in a minecraft UI setting, try recent versions of the blood magic mod for minecraft. Its essentially unplayable without a web browser and google on a second monitor, but is a cool design and worth the effort. Also like DF its a bit grindy. And it grows on people such that people tend to really like it, warts and all.

hota_mazi 10y ago

> Practically everything is a keyboard shortcut that needs to be memorized. That's not true: most menus are displayed prominently next to their keyboard shortcut, as you can see from the screenshots in that very article. You can also simply use the arrows to pick the menu you want. There's very little memorization required, the effort is learning how the interactions work and how they affect the game.

kjs3 10y ago

I wonder if there could ever be another Dwarf fortress? Nethack would like to have a word with you...

cryoshon 10y ago

>It's found success in being the antithesis of a AAA game yes! you have crystallized my reasons for playing df into a simple phrase. DF is 100% depth, and 0% fluff. all of the pieces matter, and there's about a bajillion of them, if you care to look.

joemi 10y ago

I wouldn't say the UI/UX has been completely ignored. In fact, to a large extent I'd say it's been quite deliberately designed. The lack of "graphics" does not necessarily lessen a game, especially one like this (or like less complicated roguelikes). I've been playing roguelikes for years (decades?) and I think the text visuals are actually better than any tile visuals I've ever tried (and I've tried a lot of tilesets for the various games I've played). As long as you know what the symbols mean, there's less ambiguity about what something is (especially at higher resolutions). Textual interfaces might not be great for a FPS, but at least to me, they're actually ideal for games like DF. Same for the keyboard interfaces. To me, the roguelike and DF style UI/UX are kind of like vim/emacs and "easier" or "prettier" game UI/UX are like MS Word. Both server their purposes well, but one is designed to be extremely powerful but it has a steep learning curve, while the other is designed to be easier for new users but the power usage can be more obscured or entirely non-existent. It's not a perfect analogy, of course, but it's my take on it.

omni 10y ago
> In fact, to a large extent I'd say it's been quite deliberately designed. I'm curious whether you actually read the article and have any thoughts on the menu within. Seemed horrible to me as an outside observer.
- joemi 10y ago
  Didn't read the article but I've played the game. As I mentioned, I've been playing roguelikes for a long time, and I think that definitely has to do with my lack of hatred for the UI.
  - zzalpha 10y ago
    If you've played the game, read the article. Dwarf Fortress is like owning an incredibly ugly dog. Everyone knows it's ugly. You can even laugh at how ridiculous it is. But you can still love it all the same.
Obi_Juan_Kenobi 10y ago

ouid 10y ago

you don't need mods, pretty sure the game ships with additional spritesheets, and replacing them is very easy. Though the ascii art is truly beautiful.

digi_owl 10y ago

> It's found success in being the antithesis of a AAA game, which is usually beautiful but shallow. Funny i should come across this claim, as reading the ebook collection of the filfre.net blog i came across a similar notion from Richard Garriott of all people. http://www.filfre.net/2015/07/the-14-deadly-sins-of-graphic-adventure-design/ http://www.filfre.net/2015/07/the-14-deadly-sins-of-graphic-... "Each time you get one of those major technology influxes, the quality of the graphics goes way up but the gameplay goes back to the simplest again because the bells and whistles have become so much cooler that you don’t need any depth. However, to compete with that [technologically pioneering title] you have to add depth, and to compete with that you have to add more depth, etc., until the next big technological advancement, when everything resets again back to that lowest common denominator of gameplay." And i think we can see this also in how over the years the sound and graphics staff of a games company has ballooned, while the number of programmers have remained largely the same.