Dwarf Fortress Devs Declined Six-Figure Licensing Offer

[ClockworkUniverse]

A note to the people saying the game needs a better UI: it absolutely does. However, if the developer reworked the UI for every release version, the 1.0 release would be 40 years down the line instead of 20. That's why it's the last thing on the development checklist.

What. Why on earth would he need to rework the UI for every release version? It's not like it would revert to his original code every time he adds a new subsystem. You create a logical layout for a UI(it doesn't even have to be the "best UI ever." Just make a UI that follows some sort of consistent internal logic), then any future additional options are added according to the same logic. It isn't difficult in the least. He just needs to sit down and do it.

You're vastly underestimating how much the game changes between versions. This is a game that has about a third of its mechanics at this point, and its UI needs already have a tremendous amount of variance. Being created organically is kind of how it ended up where it is now, and there's no guarantee that a UI that's decent for a third of the game engine will continue to be decent when the rest has been added.

People (rightly) mock the fact that different parts of the UI have different controls, but the thing is: that's not actually why the UI is confusing. The UI is confusing because different parts of the game work vastly differently, because they're just vastly different. You can't really design a system where you're using the same interface to designate where dwarves should dig, assign job classes to dwarves, and tell workshops what they need to be making. So while the interface needs improving, it's not something where he can just fix it now and have it necessarily still be fixed when the game is finished.

The thing you have to keep in mind with Dwarf Fortress is: early alpha. If the game doesn't look like it's ready for release, that's because it's not. The last seven years have pretty much just been an open playtest.

 

[1337mokro]

That is what is sad here. Not the fact the devs might or might not have plans for the UI, not that it's badness is intentional, but that you seem to want to staple and glue the game shut into it's niche.

That's exactly it, though... it IS a niche of its own.

If you simplify it, you're actively yanking it out of its niche, and leaving nothing in its place.

If you want a middleman to play, there's always Minecraft.

This is a bit like complaining that the combos in Street Fighter are too hard to pull off in the heat of a fight, so they should be made easier. Yes, they're hard... that's what we like about them. You can always go play DoA, Tekken or Mortal Kombat instead (and yes, that IS a valid recommendation).

Why would improving the UI be yanking it out of it's niche? You change literally nothing about the game other than the way you control it. Don't tell me bad UI games have now become a niche.

You could have EXACTLY the same game without the clunky menu within menu within menu UI. See Gnomoria whilst still clunky has a much smoother UI where it is labeled under different tabs all accessible with the mouse. MUCH easier, MUCH smoother and really nothing changed about the game itself.

They could have made the same UI as dwarf fortress and the gameplay would NOT have changed in the slightest, but they didn't.

I wasn't responding to the UI stuff.

I was responding to what I quoted: You're being down on him for wanting the game to stick to its niche.

He was talking about the UI being part of that niche. Also a niche is not a genre, a niche is a target audience, it would still be the same game if it was taken out of it's niche. Your example of minecraft, which is ALSO a niche game, would be a perfect example of that, starting as a niche game but with improvement after improvement it stopped being popular JUST in it's niche.

Taking something out of a niche would not change the game in any way. Which again leads to my point of UI, since when is bad UI a fucking niche?

 

[lacktheknack]

That is what is sad here. Not the fact the devs might or might not have plans for the UI, not that it's badness is intentional, but that you seem to want to staple and glue the game shut into it's niche.

That's exactly it, though... it IS a niche of its own.

If you simplify it, you're actively yanking it out of its niche, and leaving nothing in its place.

If you want a middleman to play, there's always Minecraft.

This is a bit like complaining that the combos in Street Fighter are too hard to pull off in the heat of a fight, so they should be made easier. Yes, they're hard... that's what we like about them. You can always go play DoA, Tekken or Mortal Kombat instead (and yes, that IS a valid recommendation).

Why would improving the UI be yanking it out of it's niche? You change literally nothing about the game other than the way you control it. Don't tell me bad UI games have now become a niche.

You could have EXACTLY the same game without the clunky menu within menu within menu UI. See Gnomoria whilst still clunky has a much smoother UI where it is labeled under different tabs all accessible with the mouse. MUCH easier, MUCH smoother and really nothing changed about the game itself.

They could have made the same UI as dwarf fortress and the gameplay would NOT have changed in the slightest, but they didn't.

I wasn't responding to the UI stuff.

I was responding to what I quoted: You're being down on him for wanting the game to stick to its niche.

He was talking about the UI being part of that niche. Also a niche is not a genre, a niche is a target audience, it would still be the same game if it was taken out of it's niche. Your example of minecraft, which is ALSO a niche game, would be a perfect example of that, starting as a niche game but with improvement after improvement it stopped being popular JUST in it's niche.

Taking something out of a niche would not change the game in any way. Which again leads to my point of UI, since when is bad UI a fucking niche?

It's not, I was addressing something you weren't talking about by accident. Sorry!

 

[McMullen]

Toady and Tarn seem, from that article, to be concerned about donations drying up, yet they don't seem to realize why that is a real worry for them and not for Minecraft, which is based off DF.

All they have to do is make the UI accessible, and they won't need to worry. If DF had real mouse support, intuitive menus, and an intuitive expanded tile set that didn't have to rely so much on recycling tiles, then it would draw a lot more people and donations. All these things are possible and have been done with other roguelikes.

 

[1337mokro]

That is what is sad here. Not the fact the devs might or might not have plans for the UI, not that it's badness is intentional, but that you seem to want to staple and glue the game shut into it's niche.

That's exactly it, though... it IS a niche of its own.

If you simplify it, you're actively yanking it out of its niche, and leaving nothing in its place.

If you want a middleman to play, there's always Minecraft.

This is a bit like complaining that the combos in Street Fighter are too hard to pull off in the heat of a fight, so they should be made easier. Yes, they're hard... that's what we like about them. You can always go play DoA, Tekken or Mortal Kombat instead (and yes, that IS a valid recommendation).

Why would improving the UI be yanking it out of it's niche? You change literally nothing about the game other than the way you control it. Don't tell me bad UI games have now become a niche.

You could have EXACTLY the same game without the clunky menu within menu within menu UI. See Gnomoria whilst still clunky has a much smoother UI where it is labeled under different tabs all accessible with the mouse. MUCH easier, MUCH smoother and really nothing changed about the game itself.

They could have made the same UI as dwarf fortress and the gameplay would NOT have changed in the slightest, but they didn't.

I wasn't responding to the UI stuff.

I was responding to what I quoted: You're being down on him for wanting the game to stick to its niche.

He was talking about the UI being part of that niche. Also a niche is not a genre, a niche is a target audience, it would still be the same game if it was taken out of it's niche. Your example of minecraft, which is ALSO a niche game, would be a perfect example of that, starting as a niche game but with improvement after improvement it stopped being popular JUST in it's niche.

Taking something out of a niche would not change the game in any way. Which again leads to my point of UI, since when is bad UI a fucking niche?

It's not, I was addressing something you weren't talking about by accident. Sorry!

No problem mistakes happen.

Your avatar still scares the crap outta me though.

Here's to hoping they can cut those 20 years in half if they ever do something like a kickstarter or what not.

 

[Allen Marks]

I really don't think money would speed up dev time, really, since Toady doesn't want any other developers working on the game, and he's already able to work full time on donations.

 

[PH3NOmenon]

They turned down over a hundred thousand dollars? Which they'd get for doing nothing at all? And which would let someone attach the dwarf fortress name to ONE game? Hmm...


Anyone who's into DF would not have minded. And DF will never be big, it can't be, simply by virtue of what it is.


I respect them for their integrity but can't help feel they passed up something great.

 

[BoogieManFL]

I love this game and have played it for years, and was minute before I saw this post. The level of complexity this game has already is staggering. It comes with a very steep learning curve but once you get the feel for it, it's an amazingly fun game, one I look forward to playing for probably the rest of my life. Makes me wish I had more money to donate to the cause.

Although, one can always play adventure mode which has FAR less of a learning curve. A lot of the complexity is the Fortress mode. And I was put off by the vanilla graphics, but there are some good graphic mods that make it look more like one would expect. Look for Ironhand or Phoebus packs. And you HAVE to get Soundsense, which adds fun sounds and great unique music to the game. And the forum community over there is the hands down best community I've ever came across on the internet. Great, helpful, knowledgeable people.

And to get more easily started, Google "Lazy Newb Pack" - it helps a lot.

 

[gigastar]

Really this game desperately needs a graphical update and an UI tightening. Purist will shout no but really how many NEW players actually stick with this game if not actually figure out how it works before they quit?

What, you mean there's people who DON'T use the tileset mods? Everyone I know who plays Dorf Fort has them downloaded. Playing any other way is torture to the eyes. And brain.

Which is my point, isn't it?

Everyone who ALREADY plays it or sticks around long enough to learn about them. It needs a lower entry bump into the game rather than being a gigantic hurdle. Easy to learn hard to master should be the mantra, not near impossible to learn even harder to master.

But thats part of the games charm.

Spoiler

 

[Scars Unseen]

There is nothing "charming" about DF's abomination of a UI. Someone compared it to Street Fighter earlier. A closer analogy would be a Street Fighter clone where your various punch/kick buttons remapped themselves to different buttons whenever you jumped, crouched, or changed directions.

I applaud the devs' attention to detail in the game itself. The UI, however, pretty much destroys the experience for most(even fans of other roguelikes, so this isn't just a "mainstream" issue).

 

[1337mokro]

Really this game desperately needs a graphical update and an UI tightening. Purist will shout no but really how many NEW players actually stick with this game if not actually figure out how it works before they quit?

What, you mean there's people who DON'T use the tileset mods? Everyone I know who plays Dorf Fort has them downloaded. Playing any other way is torture to the eyes. And brain.

Which is my point, isn't it?

Everyone who ALREADY plays it or sticks around long enough to learn about them. It needs a lower entry bump into the game rather than being a gigantic hurdle. Easy to learn hard to master should be the mantra, not near impossible to learn even harder to master.

But thats part of the games charm.

Spoiler

Nah, that's not really accurate. There is no 99% drop out rate because they can't even get started.

 

[KoudelkaMorgan]

So basically since this thread is becoming about 50% bitching about my hypothetical "if I was offered a million for the rights to blah blah blah" being /= to "offered six figures" yes I do understand basic math.

I chose to round up to what some would call the minimum "acceptable lump sum" from what I assumed was in the higher 6 figures. I didn't think this would even be worthy of being "news" if they were merely offered $100,000 to $200,000 as its not particularly hard to turn down that amount. (Though I would still take $100,000, ijs )

They stated that they may or may not have come out ahead financially based upon the unnamed sum being more OR less than what they might expect to receive as 10 year's earnings. In my mind I would assume they would probably want more than $10,000 a year so I rounded up in the effort to get to my point which was that I would take the money.

To everyone that seemed to be inclined to revel in their mathematical superiority, when I was using thinly veiled hyperbole, congrats. A winner is you.

Now to those who pointed out that I was incorrect in my notion that they were being offered the cash in exchange for basically all their assets and rights to the game, I freely admit that I was wrong.

In this case I would definitely take the money, because I would still have my game to work on, and if they dragged the name down somehow I could of course rebrand my product. Or not, I don't know that particulars of the deal.

 

[Scars Unseen]

So basically since this thread is becoming about 50% bitching about my hypothetical "if I was offered a million for the rights to blah blah blah" being /= to "offered six figures" yes I do understand basic math.

I chose to round up to what some would call the minimum "acceptable lump sum" from what I assumed was in the higher 6 figures. I didn't think this would even be worthy of being "news" if they were merely offered $100,000 to $200,000 as its not particularly hard to turn down that amount. (Though I would still take $100,000, ijs )

They stated that they may or may not have come out ahead financially based upon the unnamed sum being more OR less than what they might expect to receive as 10 year's earnings. In my mind I would assume they would probably want more than $10,000 a year so I rounded up in the effort to get to my point which was that I would take the money.

To everyone that seemed to be inclined to revel in their mathematical superiority, when I was using thinly veiled hyperbole, congrats. A winner is you.

Now to those who pointed out that I was incorrect in my notion that they were being offered the cash in exchange for basically all their assets and rights to the game, I freely admit that I was wrong.

In this case I would definitely take the money, because I would still have my game to work on, and if they dragged the name down somehow I could of course rebrand my product. Or not, I don't know that particulars of the deal.

The problem with taking the cash is that it is entirely possible that his donations would dry up if he took that deal. The sort of people who protest any concession to usability(because they want the game to stay niche) are the same sort that would cry "sell out" and abandon Toady if he went for that sort of deal.

 

[KoudelkaMorgan]

And I can respect that. Its easy for me, probably most of us, so say they would take the money having never been offered that much for anything that WE have made in our spare time before. Its the kind of thing that people dream of, well moreso making a product that people love and getting well compensated for it and not having someone want to have access to the NAME of our thingy.

In this case, its hard for me to relate as I have never had a creation that so many people enjoyed freely and judging from this thread if anything, quite passionately.

I've never been in a position where I had to weigh my own financial security with pissing off my fans for...getting money for a decision that has ZERO impact on the game I made that they AREN'T obligated to pay me a dime for.

Its a thin line between sure money for doing nothing, and possibly losing donations from fans. Still, I know I could live quite comfortably on $100k for at least 5 years. I don't consider relying on random people on the internet to pay me for my freeware title "living comfortably" because it could dry up in the blink of an eye for any of a million (i.e. 7 digits ) reasons.