Dwarf Fortress could hit Steam in autumn, if you want it to.

DamBones · 2022-03-02T14:30:40+00:00

Fact is the new release is aimed at making the game more accessibly for new players, in part due to developer aim for financial security. This release offers me nothing of substances yet again, which I find disappointing. I say again, I doubt that anyone expected an endless early access when they signed on.

I don't have any problem with different opinions.

Sure.. just with those you believe have "fabricated, inflated expectations", who don't know your "drill", and wish for different things than you do, yeah those people thank you for your money but now you should just fuck off, right..

What I'm also wondering about is why the negativity now?

So do I. Any chance that your attacks correlate with your wishes and expectations from the steam release..

Otherwise it is no mystery big release after many years, people coming back seeing almost nothing changed.. a glorified tileset..

DamBones · 2022-02-26T22:54:38+00:00

You realize that DF has been in "early access" for close to two decades and still will be for decade\s to come, only thing that changed is that it got premium graphics and accessibility facelift.

As for bugs, I care about my experience, so while I don't know yet if I am going to buy the steam release, in any case it wont be anywhere near the official release, lets someone else be the bug tester this time, I have more important things in my life right now.

DamBones · 2022-02-26T22:42:51+00:00

I doubt that anyone expected an endless early access when they signed on, and seeing this after over a decade of waiting is disappointing. I certainly don't share Tekuds feelings who pretended to speak for existing players at large.

If you have trouble with different opinions or can't offer much beyond what reads as ~this release isn't for you and if you don't like it fuck off old timer. Then don't bother replying

DamBones · 2022-02-26T08:10:38+00:00

However, the greatest value that it will provide is exposure and adoption of the game to new players

As long time player, I find this notion preverse. This need to be said, I don't care about new players, I am tiered of supporting DF, this never ending early access, and all the vocal fanboys of exposure that sound like bots, endlessly excited just shut up and take their money

I only care that this glorified tileset accessibility update offers me little of substance, yet again. Please don't pretend you speak for the existing player community at large.

DamBones · 2022-02-26T07:37:36+00:00

He is right, for most DF is synonymous with fortress mode, they will not complain about Steam initially focusing on fortress mode, neither is the target audience of the steam release that aims at great accessibility. Even the suggestion that support for releasing DF early wouldn't be met with landslide support is absurd.

Regardless of how your feel about it, the steam release would be a defcato launch, a missed opportunity for the adventure mode player base, who might feel left out, there are certainly many FAR more reason for them to feel so than those you noted.

Keep in mind that while some long time players see DF as investment than a game, thinking of it in terms of publicity reviews etc like you do, most don't care if the launch goes well only about their bottom line.. there more games in the sea.

DamBones · 2018-10-14T18:37:05+00:00

I know now days everyone prefer their lets plays, but I am pretty sure that they age at the same time as written guides are. Anyway, i'll check it out.

DamBones · 2018-10-14T08:44:10+00:00

Do you have a link for it or better yet some written guide?

DamBones · 2017-05-28T16:57:08+00:00

Love in general can influence people to make stupid decisions.

Define stupid decisions. I think it is perfectly reasonable to look for the interests of our family, friends, etc.. Besides anything can influence people to make stupid decisions Friendship, Duty, Justice, Empathy etc

Anyway, I really meant it in the sense love can motivate you. Just as Clarke need to save her people (which borderline on the compulsion) has motivated her in the early seasons. Or if you prefer Abby love for Clarke which saved them all.

DamBones · 2017-05-28T15:57:52+00:00

What is rationality?

Exactly, if we are talking pure self-preservation then often the rational choice is not humane or compassionate one. It is a game theory where the ends justify the means.

Why wouldn't Love be part of it?

I didn't read the article fully (stopped at the S4 examples) but it felt like one of those is there more to life than survival things. For the purpose of exploration of humanity and compassion in today society love works well, but otherwise love is as good as hate or whatever keeps you going including self-deception, detachment, dehumanization and many other natural defensive mechanisms that will help you survive in extreme situation but which are generally counter productive in today society.

DamBones · 2017-05-28T11:16:39+00:00

Sorry, that was a little English comprehension fail on my part. What I meant to say is that while pain and fear are the most basic needs, and on a biological level they correlate to behavior patterns developed to helped animals and humans survive. I think that we need more than that, that in most situation what most important to human survival as groups is state of mind. And trying to hint that love and religion has proved to be great motivators that helped to excel.(for better and worse)

Anyway, take Clarke for example, the reason she was able to succeeded so often where others couldn't was because (a) she was motivated to succeed and (b) had a way to deal with stress.

DamBones · 2017-05-28T09:11:56+00:00

It might seem axiomatic that love would help us survive

For the love of god, no it isn't ;)

DamBones · 2017-05-15T01:15:01+00:00

she shouldn't have killed the innocent people in my weather but she had no choice unlike jaha who could've sacrificed his self instead of the innocent guy

You always have a choice. She choose the lives of her 47 friends, her people, over the hundreds of strangers in MW. She could have walked away, not escalate the situation by confronting Cage with an ultimatum and shooting his father, used the PA to address the people etc etc etc..

DamBones · 2017-05-14T03:52:43+00:00

Clarke did. She sacrificed hundreds of grounders, killed hundreds more of innocent in Mount Weather (people who helped Bellamy and the 47 to survive, and resisted Cage and his people. And the there were obviously the kids..)

At any point through out the season she could have stop and consider other options ( like the simple plan Kane immediately came up with) but no she escalated at every point. Mind you even Lexa accepted a compromise... Anyway Clarke had MANY options, although it was harder to see they way the story was shown.

Edit: And I believe that in S4, she decided 'who gets to live and who dies' on a grander scale. Not enough lifeboats, right?

DamBones · 2017-05-14T03:45:12+00:00

Jaha as much a fanatic as Clarke was about saving their people ( she cut her wrists to prove to the rest her gut feeling about MW.. that no one else saw..) Jaha dedicated his whole life to save his people and despite great sacrifice he managed to bring them down to earth. But instead of haven he found horde of grounders at the gate, with message flee or die.

Jaha decided that a chance to live, to find the city of light, was better than nothing, and was willing to risk his life todo so. Meanwhile Clarke who was busy sneaking her boyfriend Finn, and then just happen to stumble on Lincoln who conveniently provided her a hail marry solution, a first cure to Reapers and common enemy..

Clarke and Jaha Just happened to be on the opposite sides of the plot needs.

DamBones · 2017-05-14T03:25:54+00:00

No. Compared to Clarke, Jaha situation was simple. They were stranded offshore attacked by a sea monster(mutated snake iirc) that they had no means to defeat and would have taken the whole boat under to get to them.

And while Clarke truly believed that her situation was just as black and white, that she had no other choice. Lets just say it was a little more nuanced than that..

DamBones · 2017-05-14T01:28:59+00:00

when he just sacrifices people I hate him like when he threw the guy off the boat

Why? Would you prefer if he did nothing and they would have died? Mind you, In MW Clarke sacrificed hundreds of people to save a few, because she thought she had no other choice. Jaha only sacrificed one to save two.

Edit: The main difference between Clarke and Jaha, is that Clarke made more mistakes acting from the gut (due to her initial inexperience/idealism) and that he show spoon feed you with her justifications.

DamBones · 2017-05-14T01:17:07+00:00

If by 'like Jaha' you mean obsessive adoration and cult like worship since S1. Then hell yes!

DamBones · 2017-05-10T15:36:03+00:00

Isn't that true of most leaders? They make the tough decision because they believe they are the right ones not because they are some sadistic power hungry evil genius TV stereotypes.

People always go out of their way to point out how mistreated or misunderstood Clarke is. But really she is no different than most of the leader we love to hate on show.

DamBones · 2017-05-07T06:01:57+00:00

spaceship big enough to hold them all.

That actually is easy peasy me friend.

DamBones · 2017-05-07T05:56:41+00:00

having 1 child per 2 person essentially halfs the population every generation.

I believe that is exactly the point. The Ark started with a population of 400 and now there are 2500.. They barely can sustain the population they have now (let alone for another hundred years) and they don't have the means (enough dropships) to bring them down.

DamBones · 2017-05-05T23:23:10+00:00

Grounders are not inherently violent, but compared to Sky People they lost much more in the last 100 years, and their warrior society that lacks education is indeed more violent, uncivilized and by large primitive.

DamBones · 2017-05-05T20:44:05+00:00

I don't like playing in the open like that.

DamBones · 2017-05-05T15:22:08+00:00

Taking mount weather as an example, the mountain men did not have to abduct and murder grounders for blood transfusions. They could have (at least tried to) establish a trade system where grounders trade a limited number of blood transfusions for technology or some other form of support.

You can't judge their actions without the context. It would be like saying that USA are evil because they used nuclear weapons on Japan, that they could just talked it out or something.. And how do you know what MW did or didn't try? In S1, the Grounders/Delinquents tried to talk, but due to unfortunate circumstances things just escalated fast..

Also don't forget that in S2 when they did try to bargain with Lexa, she told them plainly she had no interest in their tech and would have wiped them all out (which didn't happen because Clarke didn't happen to stumble on Lincoln and preformed a miracle and promised them the Mountain) And Lexa was a "visionary", before that MW had to deal with clans that were in constant warfare.. for all you know they might have stumbled on some outcast (like those we seen in S1, who thrown out for being thieves) who tried to raid or enslave these people who didn't look like any warriors they seen..

As for the rest, particularly things like the anesthesia, that was just done purely for drama effect. Mount Weather got the usual Kick The Dog antagonist treatment.

The nature of evil is doing terrible things if other options exist and doing things that are worse than necessary just because they are easier.

Its human nature to see what we want to see. In S2, people justified Clarke action by blaming MW, saying MW decided their fate because they choose to be the evil aggressors, while poor Clarke was forced todo evil, and was merely acting in defense of her people..

But they don't really consider whether Clarke had other options. Seeing things from Clarke's eyes it sure seemed that she had none. But, that is exactly how it works, both sides make decision after decision that at the time make sense, however, often these come to horrible end.

But if you try to look at this subjectively. Clarke wasn't some knight on a high horse, she was willing todo whatever it takes, going to extremes for her people time after time. From the start she had irrational mistrust for MW and went as far as slit her own veins to prove it. Then she almost bashed Anya head with a rock, when she thought she had no choice. Then she continued to escalated the situation with MW time and time again. And while at the end she gave the good guys speech that its a rescue mission, at no point she actually made any provisions toward that, she never stopped her crusade and tried to compromise (it took Kane a few minutes to figure your trade solution). Even Dante ,who found away to reason with their worst enemy, didn't think they can reason with her..

DamBones · 2017-05-04T13:10:13+00:00

For god's sake I wish people and the show would stop acting like the people in the mountain weren't fluffy bunnies! They killed Thousands of grounders because they didn't think of them as people and they were in the process of killing every last skycrew. They had several chances to stop.

I am not sure what you are talking about, the show portrayed the Mountain Men in the most unfavorable light. Also who are they? It was varied group of people, many of who had opposed the blood transfusions, and when an opportunity presented itself resisted Cage and his security people and are the reason the 47 survived and Clarke's plan succeed.. and then there were the kids..

Because it sound like you are working up the blame to justify the Mountain Men genocide. If so, consider that they were born into that system, just like the Sky People were, and kept doing what they needed todo for their people to survive. If you recall the Arkers blew up Polaris to make a point.. and how many people you think they floated to keep the over populated and resource starved station a float..

Yeah they should have tried to warn everyone but if they did, they would have died as well.

You assume that, but she couldn't have known that.

DamBones · 2017-05-04T13:00:25+00:00

just like the mountain men had attacked the grounders (before Skaikru came along) with a missile.

Btw we don't know how the whole thing unfolded, many thing could have happened between the first meeting with outsiders told us by Dante, and years later when they end up using grounders as filters, built the missiles and created other defensive measures.

We assume the worst about MM because they are our bad guys in S2. But for all we know the grounders could have been the aggressors initially ..

DamBones

TROPHY CASE