This or Rimworld?

[Archon]

Curious if you've played both which is more worth it to learn and play?

[RoyalFox]

Both. With 4600 hours on Rimworld on steam and who knows how many hours on Classic DF and 26 hours on Premium DF I can say both scratch a different itch. Dwarf Fortress is a lot easier to make a successful fortress but Rimworld is a lot easier to actively play with how streamlined it is. Both have wildly different game mechanics. It's like a comparison between call of duty and battlefield, they're both just different.

[Kaptain_Kabul]

Rimworld is for people who:

- like playing smaller groups
- like sci-Fi setting
- like having a smooth UI
- like having only one z-level to care about

DF is offering a bigger scope, more freedom and more depth at the cost of a clunky UI (yes still clunky)

I prefer DF, since everything just feels more alive and organic.
More crazy things can happen. The Z-Levels really pay off big time when you like to build projects.

But Rtimworld is fine,too.

[Water]

Rimworld is the easiest to play, has one layer of depth, and has a better UI. You take a much more active role in the daily life of your population. Mods also include replayability to an absurd degree. Very much the more polished but less complex game.

Dwarf Fortress is harder to play, puts a lot of effort into depth of simulation and literal terrain depth. It's a whole other experience compared to Rimworld, and so can't be directly compared.

Play Rimworld, see if you like it, play Dwarf Fortress in a few months.

[freekwhensee]

both and oxygen not included, going medival and stranded

[Ebyl]

You can also play the original version of DF for free and see what you think.

[McFuzz]

If you haven't played Rimworld or DF, honnnnnnnnnnnnestly despite the fact that I would say DF is the better game hands down no competition, I still think I would recommend Rimworld to genre newbies.

But it goes without saying, Tynan's milking of his game is frankly insulting, and I'm not even saying that in a "waaa I'm an entitled consoomer!" way. His original game sold like hotcakes, and he has the nuts to make feature updates (most of which unbalance the game) cost 10 bucks less than the vanilla. Overpriced, poorly thought out exploitation.

[RoyalFox]

Originally posted by Frank McFuzz:

If you haven't played Rimworld or DF, honnnnnnnnnnnnestly despite the fact that I would say DF is the better game hands down no competition, I still think I would recommend Rimworld to genre newbies.

But it goes without saying, Tynan's milking of his game is frankly insulting, and I'm not even saying that in a "waaa I'm an entitled consoomer!" way. His original game sold like hotcakes, and he has the nuts to make feature updates (most of which unbalance the game) cost 10 bucks less than the vanilla. Overpriced, poorly thought out exploitation.

I think every dlc he does gets better than the last actually. And mods improve upon that, although the same is said about DF and the huge amount of total conversions available on bay 12.

[Vulpeculus]

If you have 100 bucks to put into the full experience and want a pleasant, smooth, more atmospheric and contemplative game to play, go for Rimworld.

If you want the deepest gameplay and can deal with clunky UI and totally unintuitive controls, and a less contemplative, more imagination-based gameplay, then forget about Rimworld and get DF, it's cheaper, much deeper,, and the gameplay is more emergent than scripted like Rimworld. But bear in mind that the steep lurning curve of DF is not because of its complexity, but because of its unintuitive UI that will make you google-search for basically every aspect of the game, so if you're not into this, forget about DF.

[Erei]

Compairing both. Rimworld is more about game than stories. It's also easier to understand/more streamlined with a better overall UI, at the cost of complexity. Meanwhile, DF is a real story generator (and world to). Also, Rimworld try to keep you "alive but suffering", between the storyteller buffs and debuffs (many hidden, like the pawn death chance), and nerfing all the ways a player can come up to defend themselves (killbox, underground fort...). While DF generally doesn't care at all, and you can be as safe or not as you want to.
If you want to manage a small scale colony and don't care much about stories that will develop, then Rimworld is possibly better.
If you want to build a fortress and have small (or big at times) stories that develop, many a bit silly, then DF is best.

In rimworld, you seek to survive, which usually involve some gamey stuff or "meta" (like most games really). In DF you get a giant who pick up a sock and beat a random dwarf to death. You can do the "meta" but DF is not meant to do that, and it's actually stupid easy to be 100% safe (and unfun).

[Videogame Jukebox]

I own all of them inclusing Oxygen Not Included. They are all good and do what they do, well.

[Videogame Jukebox]

Originally posted by Erei:

Compairing both. Rimworld is more about game than stories. It's also easier to understand/more streamlined with a better overall UI, at the cost of complexity. Meanwhile, DF is a real story generator (and world to). Also, Rimworld try to keep you "alive but suffering", between the storyteller buffs and debuffs (many hidden, like the pawn death chance), and nerfing all the ways a player can come up to defend themselves (killbox, underground fort...). While DF generally doesn't care at all, and you can be as safe or not as you want to.
If you want to manage a small scale colony and don't care much about stories that will develop, then Rimworld is possibly better.
If you want to build a fortress and have small (or big at times) stories that develop, many a bit silly, then DF is best.

In rimworld, you seek to survive, which usually involve some gamey stuff or "meta" (like most games really). In DF you get a giant who pick up a sock and beat a random dwarf to death. You can do the "meta" but DF is not meant to do that, and it's actually stupid easy to be 100% safe (and unfun).

My dog started crap with an Ox and almost died....Killed the Ox. Supreme dog being this thing is. Smells a flower and died.

[Eqqsquizitine Buble-Schwinslow]

Rimworld is a loot more noob friendly.

Dwarf Fortress teaches you to enjoy CBT, and I'm not referring to "Cognitive Behavior Therapy", if you catch my drift.

[McFuzz]

Originally posted by Eqqsquizitine Buble-Schwinslow:

Rimworld is a loot more noob friendly.

Dwarf Fortress teaches you to enjoy CBT, and I'm not referring to "Cognitive Behavior Therapy", if you catch my drift.

Jokes on you, I already liked that

[hellosharkness]

I used to play Rimworld vanilla, then started modding. Now I cannot play it without 300 some on mods. Even with that, it is not as deep as DF. That being said, if you have never played the genre, it wouldn't hurt to start with Rim and get into DF later. I am new to DF, and am doing pretty well on my first go of it, because of my ~1800 hour in Rim. Though, I often thought that Rim lacked character depth. (They are called pawns for a reason). The dwarves though, the lack of direct control you have over them puts you in a bit of an overseer/observer position, makes them feel more alive, and it is really enjoyable imo. Another thing that I have noticed. In Rimworld, when one of your pawns isn't working (unless fulfilling a need) - you are doing something wrong. In DF, when a dwarf isn't currently working it seems like part of the experience and adds to the organic feel.

TLDR

Rim is easier, has less learning curve, and prettier, but lacks the depth and organic feels. Rim is also nearly $100 and NEEDS mod (imo) to be really enjoyable.

DF is harder (because it is still a bit clunky), but the simulation runs DEEP.

DF is more worth it in the long run (there is a reason people have played it for over 10 years), Rim is fun, but each colony starts to feel the exact same, and even mods lose their shininess eventually.

[Mungrul]

You can't make stuff using your own imagination in Rimworld.
In DF, I once solved an FPS issue by creating an automated device that drowned babies.