Gamasutra: The Art & Business of Making Gamesspacer
View All     RSS
October 21, 2014
arrowPress Releases
October 21, 2014
PR Newswire
View All
View All     Submit Event





If you enjoy reading this site, you might also want to check out these UBM Tech sites:


 
Lifelong Development (ex: Dwarf Fortress)
by Craig Ellsworth on 03/19/13 01:24:00 pm   Featured Blogs

The following blog post, unless otherwise noted, was written by a member of Gamasutra’s community.
The thoughts and opinions expressed are those of the writer and not Gamasutra or its parent company.

 

So I've been thinking a bit recently about Dwarf Fortress, and one unique quality (of many) of the game is that it is a lifelong endeavor for the Adams brothers, and therefore a lifelong endeavor for the fans.

Tarn Adams has stated that it'll be at least twenty years before it's finished, and it's already been released for six years--and was being worked on for four years before its first release, making it a thirty year run before it's even considered complete.

I don't think there is any videogame that has that kind of staying power.  Sure, we recognize the classics for their historical value, and maybe we still get a little fun out of them, but really, how often are you going to play Galaga, when you could play any number of modern shmups?

Yet Dwarf Fortress isn't intended to be overshadowed by newer, more evolved games in its genre, partly because it's in a genre of its own, and partly because it's a never ending game.

Even twenty years from now, assuming that there is still technology to play it, the popularity of Dwarf Fortress will reach its apex at its final release (and perhaps even then Tarn would technically call it the 1.0 release, and might continue working on it), and it's legacy will be more than a historical curiosity.  People won't play Dwarf Fortress for a quick thrill like you might dust off the old Pac-Man machine; I expect they'll be playing it as fervently as ever, spending months perfecting their fortress, only to have it destroyed by some night creature invasion they weren't prepared for.

And even though other games (Minecraft, for instance) claim Dwarf Fortress as a major inspiration, they won't achieve the longevity.  Console games die when a new console comes out, and usually far before that.  PC games die more slowly, since tools like DOSBOX and resources like GOG.com exist, but they, too, peaked in popularity when they came out, not fifteen years later.  Any resurgence in old games comes mostly from older players who want to relive the memories of their youth.  Today's twelve-year-olds aren't likely to pick up Zork.

And though Dwarf Fortress isn't going to sway any non-gamers to join the ranks, it will continue to gain popularity with the hardest of the hardcore Sim, RTS, RPG, and Adventure gamers--partly by design.

Part of the reason Dwarf Fortress will last is simply because Tarn won't stop coding anytime soon.  This is the first time (or one of the first times) that a developer lets us take the development journey with them.  Dwarf Fortress is not a complete game, and won't be for twenty years.  At least, that's what Tarn tells us.  People play it now and love it, and don't see anything missing, until the next release, when they jump right into the game to discover the latest improvements and additions.

With other games, when the game comes out, that's the end of the line.  At least, in the old days that was the idea.  Now we've got DLC and always-on MMOs, stretching the lifespan of games into years, rather than simply days, weeks, or (if they're lucky) months.

Yet at some point a newer, flashier game comes out that is similar to the old one, and starts stealing players.  MMOs are still evolving, so when a new one comes out, players migrate, especially if they don't have the cash for monthly subscriptions to multiple games.

Dwarf Fortress doesn't have this problem for two reasons.  First, of course, is that it's free; there's a donation button on their website (bay12games.com), but the game itself has no charge.  Secondly, it's in a class of its own, and there has been nothing that has even attempted to outdo what Dwarf Fortress has done.  There is simply no such thing as a flashier Dwarf Fortress, and there can't be, by definition.

Tarn Adams threw out every principle of modern games when he started making Dwarf Fortress: he made the graphics nothing but ASCII art, and yet the programming behind the gameplay can actually slow down modern computers.  This is the sort of game that looks like it should have been made in the seventies, but couldn't have been.

In that way, it's actually kind of timeless.

Although I think the Adams brothers are geniuses, I am surprised there haven't been any clones.  Of course they would be inferior, but that's never stopped companies in the past.

While I think the particular gameplay of Dwarf Fortress won't be matched for some time, I wonder how viable the business end of it is.  Tarn makes a variable and modest living off donations, so it makes me wonder if others could do it too, or if Dwarf Fortress is a fluke.

What I mean is that I wonder if others might make a lifetime-long game, always releasing content, and see how far that gets them.  Even the longest running MMOs dwindle after a time, shut their doors, and lock up, especially when a challenger comes.  But since Dwarf Fortress has no challenger, it lives until Tarn Adams decides to kill it.  Could another game developer do that, and make a living off it?

I guess my main question in all this is:  do videogames have to die?

There are analog games that have had lives much, much longer than the longest running videogame, and I will even excuse outliers like Chess.  But who doesn't have a copy of Monopoly lying around?  It's issued to you when you're born.  Parker Brothers hasn't touched it pretty much since it came out (and I don't count various themed versions as really being any different).  It has no DLC, so to speak, yet even if you hate Monopoly, everyone's got a story about it.

On the other end, Magic: The Gathering is a game with content that comes out practically every day, and it's still a staple of geek culture.

Yet I suspect that Monopoly, Magic, and Dwarf Fortress will still be around twenty years from now, but World of Warcraft won't.  Even though WoW is still going strong, and content is still being released, at some point the payments will dry up, or at least enough to not be able to support the product anymore, and WoW will shut down.  Blizzard, in the meantime, may move on to other products, or even make WoW 2, which will bring WoW a swifter death.

But in any case, the corporate structure of big games seems to suggest that they can't follow the lifelong model of Bay 12 Games.  Despite Dwarf Fortress' small popularity, it is enough for the developer to live off.  A bigger developer wouldn't be able to consider that a success, but a two-man team can.

I wonder if the likes of Dwarf Fortress will bring a rise of ultra-small indies, and connected to it, the rise of lifelong games.

Might more developers take players on the development journey with them?

Is this a natural extension of how games are evolving, or is Dwarf Fortress a one-time fluke?

To see this article with pictures and jokes, as well as other articles, reviews, and development logs, check out http://scattergamed.blogspot.com/


Related Jobs

Rumble Entertainment, Inc.
Rumble Entertainment, Inc. — San Mateo, California, United States
[10.21.14]

Technical Product Manager - Platform (Chinese Fluency)
Zindagi Games
Zindagi Games — Camarillo, California, United States
[10.21.14]

MOBILE Art Director
InnoGames GmbH
InnoGames GmbH — Hamburg, Germany
[10.21.14]

Mobile Developer C++ (m/f)
Treyarch / Activision
Treyarch / Activision — Santa Monica, California, United States
[10.21.14]

Senior UI Artist (temporary) Treyarch






Comments


Michael Joseph
profile image
Doom 2 is still around and still being developed... just not by the original developers.

There are games like Falcon 4.0 that are still being developed... just not by the original developers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_4.0

Minecraft could be such a game easily.

So there's something special that's non superficial about the game that endears itself to it's players (originality, depth, a commitment to high fidelity simulation, etc) and then there's something of the Noonian Soong / Gepetto desire within the creator to keep tinkering with a creation until it feels all grown up. If the original developers don't have the commitment and resolve to raise their baby to adulthood, maybe the players will.

EDIT: Games like Chess and Monopoly i think survive for completely different reasons. They are simple and elegant designs, easy to learn, very affordable, and are cultural artifacts. But did they need years of tinkering to complete? Maybe technically as rules changed slightly over the years but that doesn't strike me as being analagous to the type of systems engineering commitment we see at Bay12 w/ DF.

EDIT2: There are games out there that seem to me could have had a long life but perhaps the developers just got burnt out and threw in the towel. Or maybe the developers who really loved the game no longer had the rights and the new IP owners only love games for what they can do for their bottom line and can't see the profit in supporting developers on projects past a certain time. I think gaming history is litered with examples of IP rights issues seperating the devs who loved their games and who would have continued patching/updating but could not.

In fact if this were 20 or 30 years ago, Dwarf Fortress might've been published and become abandonware long ago.

Ramon Carroll
profile image
Interesting premise. Of all the time I've spent playing DF (mainly in adventure mode), I don't think I've ever really put much thought into the "business model". Are they truly making enough to live off of (even "modestly"), or is it just a nice small addition to whatever their main source of income actually is?

Michael Joseph
profile image
Their "Support Bay 12 Games" page
http://www.bay12games.com/support.html
has a recurring support payment option. They might have more than a few loyal fans who are sponsoring the long term development of the game in this way.

Dino Subijano
profile image
I think a good point to bring up would be that the genre Dwarf Fortress is in is 'Roguelike.' That genre has huge replayability. While there are other roguelikes out there, I guess the sheer number of variables to affect gameplay in DF are just mind boggling wherein a game like FTL has a small number in comparison. Those variables affect the outcome of each gameplay and therefore makes it more varied. The fact that he has the patience to tweak those variables and possibly add more down the line is a labor of love thats hard to emulate.

Benjamin Shadwick
profile image
Dwarf Fortress is not a roguelike, except maybe in adventure mode. It just happens to look a bit like one because of the ASCII graphics, replayability and fantasy setting.

Fundamentally it is a simulation game, like SimCity.

The roguelike label is being applied too widely these days.

Enrique Dryere
profile image
I've got a lot of respect for the Adams brothers and hope that the game my brother and I are working on, Ring Runner, can achieve one iota of its staying power. This, in fact, has been the major driving force behind our design: to create a game that can be played for a decade.

To do that, not only do you need a ton of procedural content and emergent game play, but you need to remain relevant in your genre, or as this article stated, carve out your own genre.

It's taken us 5 years to get to where we are, but I think the game stands poised to offer players a lot of replayability for many years to come. The thought of working on it for another 25 years literally makes me wanna go skydiving without a parachute, so I really admire the Adams bros for their commitment and devotion.

Kevin Reese
profile image
There are two highly, highly, highly under-rated (IMHO) components of this game that give its appeal: complexity and randomness.

In an age of the majority of mainstream games getting simpler and simpler, there are many gamers that crave something that can't be figured out within an hour. I could list examples for hours. But I'll just quickly mention two: Diablo 3 [randomized maps removed] and Simcity [the gameplay mechanics are embarrassingly simple for a simulation game. Hard to have a satisfying sim when you fudge numbers.)

There'll be a market for Dwarf Fortress for a long time to come.

I've had Nethack (now SLASHEM) on my PCs for over 10 years now. Every once in a while I will go back to play it. Because it is very complex, very random, and very difficult. Games that have these three traits are incredibly rare .

Kevin Reese
profile image
There are two highly, highly, highly under-rated (IMHO) components of this game that give its appeal: complexity and randomness.

In an age of the majority of mainstream games getting simpler and simpler, there are many gamers that crave something that can't be figured out within an hour. I could list examples for hours. But I'll just quickly mention two: Diablo 3 [randomized maps removed] and Simcity [the gameplay mechanics are embarrassingly simple for a simulation game. Hard to have a satisfying sim when you fudge numbers.)

There'll be a market for Dwarf Fortress for a long time to come.

I've had Nethack (now SLASHEM) on my PCs for over 10 years now. Every once in a while I will go back to play it. Because it is very complex, very random, and very difficult. Games that have these three traits are incredibly rare .

Arnaud Clermonté
profile image
"I am surprised there haven't been any clones"
Well there are games such as Gnomoria, which seem to have the same gameplay, though probably simpler and with proper pixels:
http://gnomoria.com/


none
 
Comment: