Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Regular reports on Factorio development.
Jürgen Erhard
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2016 11:29 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Post by Jürgen Erhard » Sat Jan 27, 2018 4:58 am

If more PvP means you (have to) mess with SP and make it worse for people who don't want to PvP (me? Not even MP, nobody likes my style :D)… then no, it would not help, but hurt. Obviously, my personal opinion here is the absolute truth.

User avatar
Drury
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 679
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 8:01 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Post by Drury » Sat Jan 27, 2018 6:37 am

Tekky wrote:Currently, the most efficient layouts are often unintuitive and "hacky". For example, it is often possible to do things where the graphics clearly imply that it should not be possible. Examples of this are inserters interacting directly with underground belts and underground belts being used as belt lane splitters.

Up to now, this has not been much of a problem, because if you didn't like these unintuitive, "hacky" layouts, it was possible to avoid them. In single-player games, you are not forced to build these layouts, if you don't like them. However, in competitive game modes, you will be forced to also use these highly efficient "hacky" layouts, because if you don't, your opponent still will, giving him an advantage.

Therefore, the only way to prevent this unfair advantage would be to impose stricter rules on player layouts, as I have suggested in this thread.
That's silly.

There's a boatload of competitive games that embraced their unique quirks. Rocketjumping for instance, is a quirk of the Quake engine turned into a competitive advantage. Now it's ubiquitous and iconic of the series (and some others, such as Team Fortress). Skiing down hills to gain ridiculous speed in Tribes games, similarly a quirk of the engine, made a staple of the series with sprawling hilly maps. Putting items on underground belt entrances in Factorio is perfectly tame in comparison. It makes perfect sense once you have seen it. It allows layouts that would otherwise be impossible. Why get rid of it?
Image

User avatar
Alice3173
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 115
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2016 11:35 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Post by Alice3173 » Sat Jan 27, 2018 8:21 am

Jürgen Erhard wrote:If more PvP means you (have to) mess with SP and make it worse for people who don't want to PvP (me? Not even MP, nobody likes my style :D)… then no, it would not help, but hurt. Obviously, my personal opinion here is the absolute truth.
I hate that so many devs are starting to focus on competitive garbage. It seems like everyone and their mother only care about that crap anymore. If you like it, cool. But there's a lot of people who buy games like Factorio with singleplayer in mind. Multiplayer, let alone competitive, weren't even a thought when I got the game. I'd much rather have a good singleplayer campaign and leave competitive stuff to mods. The whole subject kinda reminds me of Valve who used to develop great singleplayer games and now develop exclusively hypercompetitive pvp trash which leaves a rather bad taste in my mouth.

doppelEben
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2016 6:21 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Post by doppelEben » Sat Jan 27, 2018 8:47 am

wlfbck wrote:
Do you have any ideas for new scenarios, or improvements to the current ones?
Instead of quoting a long list of ideas i would have myself: WC3 and SC2 fun maps. They should give heaps of ideas of what could be done in Factorio (in it's own style), especially on the PvP side which you seem to fancy.
especially the tower-defense and line/team-tower-wars section. Would need custom towers and creeps and stuff but would be a blast; a tower defense where you have to produce enoughh ammo to keep up with the waves for example. looking at factorio in sight of those things: millions of possibilities

Koub
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 4691
Joined: Fri May 30, 2014 8:54 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Post by Koub » Sat Jan 27, 2018 9:29 am

I see I'm not the only one who favors singleplayer. Actually, this is my personal rating :
- Single player : love it.
- Cooperative Multiplayer : Since I stopped playing MMOs, I almost don't practice it anymore.
- Competitive multiplayer : Usually dislike the genre. Most of the time, I just see this as a "who's got the biggest dick" competition.
- Full PvP : Almost can't express how much I hate it and the "this is wrong" feeling I get. It makes me feel as if given real weapons and encouraged to fight other people until there is only one left. I have seen incredible frustration induced rage with PvP, and it seems to encourage the emergence of the worst behaviours in some people. It has always been the source of immense incomprehension seeing how much people seem to love fighting each others when I see what games have the most success : All the grat FPSes have been played so much more for their pvp content than for their solo content. Loog at PUBG's success. I just cannot understand what draws people to this, it's way beyond any hope of comprehension for me (but I understand and accept that others have pleasures that differ from mine, and respect their difference as long as I don't have to endure the same).

So back to the topic. quite logically, this dictates what I would prefer the devs to spend their time on for my game pleasure. Give me the very best single player gameplay experience, and I'll be the happiest man.

The only problem is : how much success would the game have had if there had not been any multiplayer in it ? Look at the different catégories I have enumerated at the beginning of my post. Fit famous games in them, and ask yourselves how much success these games would have had if they had been only single player, or only coop multi ...

I'm sure Factorio supporting multiplayer has massively boosted its sales, which in returns has given the devs enough money to hire more staff and ... give us better single player content. So even though I was disappointed when the devs introduced multiplayer back with 0.11 (well that doesn't make us any younger, does it ? :mrgreen:), I now have to admit it was an investment that indirectly benefited me.

However, I'm pretty sure Factorio is not the kind of game whose single player will benefit that much from providing PvP content. Until proven wrong, I'm convinced better PvP can not benefit the game as much as better coop multi did. So I hope not too much of the dev's time will be diverted into this niche usage.
Koub - Please consider English is not my native language.

doppelEben
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2016 6:21 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Post by doppelEben » Sat Jan 27, 2018 10:01 am

Koub wrote:The only problem is : how much success would the game have had if there had not been any multiplayer in it ? Look at the different catégories I have enumerated at the beginning of my post. Fit famous games in them, and ask yourselves how much success these games would have had if they had been only single player, or only coop multi ...
Sure.. A friends of mine introduced me to the game and I instantly installed a headless on our root-server to play my first playthrough in cooperative. 0.11 or 0.12 back then. and it was amazing. I wont miss the time spent together on the server. BUT: as I grew up in the game; our interests separated us; we didnt even played to the rocket. he paused playing; and I started all over again with huge overhauls; like bobs & angels and stuff. Since then I even the achievement-playthroughs (111 crafts; rail in 90 minutes f.E.) in singleplayer and spent some hundred hours in singleplayer. Just made the no-laser, no-solar, 111 crafts and 1 other achievement 1 week ago; even I started to play a long time ago. Never touched any multiplayer / cooperative back again. I guess I would play the game even if we didnt have the possibility to install a headless and play coop. But that wouldnt mean I would decline a chance to play a neeth cooperative playthrough. But I would just play it besides my factories I have running right now in SP

Like Big Pharma. Spent endless hours in singleplayer. ARK? Same story as above: first few hours in cooperative; but since then I play on my local computer in singleplayer. even the new DLC abberation I play completetly on my own.

I really love strategy-games on multiplayer, like settlers; or anno (grew up with settlers 1 & command and conquer and anno franchices) but I still prefer to play most games in singleplayer. Even if I dont miss a chance to play in cooperative.

Its just a matter of marketing; if you can sell your singleplayer-product. And I think with a fresh idea of a game, like factorio had at the time - I mean beside "construction-lanes" and "big pharma" I dont know any other game which I would put into the same category; its like an own category of games - you just need to represent the game in a good way and you will still have enough fans. Even though you can reach both if you add multiplayer-stuff, because then both fractions can live beside each other.
koub wrote:However, I'm pretty sure Factorio is not the kind of game whose single player will benefit that much from providing PvP content. Until proven wrong, I'm convinced better PvP can not benefit the game as much as better coop multi did. So I hope not too much of the dev's time will be diverted into this niche usage.
Its just the all-around the pvp-things that must been done, where singleplayers dont benefit. But as soon as the PVP section 'generates' ingame-stuff; I really think it could be a great opportunity. Like the custom-maps in warcraft 3 ft (or now sc2) - how many of them I played for hours on my own. and yet they would have never been created, if there wasnt the game existing for competetive stuff

xng
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2014 1:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Post by xng » Sat Jan 27, 2018 11:32 am

How long will belt compression take to fix? Leaving the game in this state for such a long time is not very nice. And, no, there are no working workarounds for this even though a few people seems to believe so, I've tried them all.

User avatar
DarkyPupu
Inserter
Inserter
Posts: 49
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:46 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Post by DarkyPupu » Sat Jan 27, 2018 12:07 pm

Not interested at all on Competitive PvP mode.

I'm slightly worried that game would evolve into some kind of RTS actually, which is not the original point IMO and would make the game be "like lots of others". I'd prefer to see the original single player, or multiplayer-coop developed instead of competitive.

At this stage the endgame content is rather... perfectible and i would prefer to see this developed first.

Overall i am on same wavelength as Koub on his post.

Aardwolf
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 92
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 2:05 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Post by Aardwolf » Sat Jan 27, 2018 12:46 pm

A scenario involving trains could be nice. Challenges relates to rail signals, complicated tracks with multiple trains, etc... I'm not an expert on trains to suggest more specifics. This is exactly why I'd like such scenario! I always tend to use belts in freeplay

Preferably for single player, but I won't stop you from making a competitive rail signal handling scenario of course, I would just probably only play a single player one myself :)

User avatar
Fumelfo
Burner Inserter
Burner Inserter
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2017 11:53 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Post by Fumelfo » Sat Jan 27, 2018 1:12 pm

I'd really like a scenario around circuit network, or trains.
Maybe a scenario with only small factories like the factory floor, but like an infinity of them, spaced by like 1000 tiles, so you have to use trains absolutely. Maybe some larger spaces for larger intersection etc
For the circuit, I don't know... That would be tricky. A factory where you can only place logistic related stuff, and have to try to optimize an existing factory to reach a certain production or something.

Just came up with the two ideas, but the train one feels so niiice, would almost have me modding it

British_Petroleum
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 314
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 7:21 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Post by British_Petroleum » Sat Jan 27, 2018 1:49 pm

I would love to watch more competitive factorio, would be great if it became popular

teenusa
Inserter
Inserter
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2015 1:36 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Post by teenusa » Sat Jan 27, 2018 3:04 pm

I really like the multiplayer of factorio, but I never play PvP.
PvP is not an Genre I like at all in factorio.

I rarely play Singleplayer and when I play it, most opf the time I design some new Circuit netwirk thingis and other such things.
I think about 80% of my playtime is Multplayer.
Sorry for my nasty mistakes.
Unfortunately english is not my native language.
And mistakes are special effect of my keyboard ;D

nascat
Burner Inserter
Burner Inserter
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 7:57 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Post by nascat » Sat Jan 27, 2018 5:52 pm

I have been interested in scenarios for a while.

I like the idea of a pvp scenario that is a reverse tug of war where there is lanes between bases, and players do some sort of manufacturing to build biters and other combat units that march towards the enemy base.

The other idea I had was a mode where everyone starts in different areas and are unable to get to the other player starting points. Also these areas would not have every resource a base needs, but it would be different per each area. So for the bases to continue moving forward they would need to trade with each other, but since they cannot reach each other, a train would loop around all of the bases where the players can put up their items for sale and buy the other items they are missing from the other bases

Avezo
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 439
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 3:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Post by Avezo » Sat Jan 27, 2018 7:01 pm

I'm wondering, wouldn't it be easier to generate shadows in-game from object sprites instead of using separate shadow sprites? With lots of sprites overlapping it might be much less taxing on hardware.

Daid
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 162
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 7:42 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Post by Daid » Sat Jan 27, 2018 8:49 pm

Tekky wrote:
Daid wrote:When I read the title of the FFF, I hoped to read something about the most neglected part of the whole game. But sadly, I was wrong.

Still noting to improve/add-on the campaign. Shame.
Factorio developer Klonan has already stated that he is planning to rewrite the whole campaign and even make it co-op playable:
Klonan wrote:
Drury wrote:The campaign is a dead branch. I hope it either gets expanded or removed. It just sticks out like a sore thumb.
I am planning to write a completely new campaign, which will replace both current campaigns, have a proper story, and be co-op compatible and fun
Taken from here.
Sorry, but I'm putting that statement of Klonan on the pile of "good ideas that are currently not happening". Like the spidertron and space platforms. If you read back a lot of ideas and plans never make it.

TheRaph
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 147
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2017 6:31 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Post by TheRaph » Sat Jan 27, 2018 10:00 pm

I for myself do not play much multi player factorio. So I would prefer the devs would spend more time in improve the single player mode and especially the campaign.
But I also accept the fact that there are many players who like multi player factorio.
Sometimes I wach multi player streams over twich or on YouTube. But the most annoying thing is to see how some people use the same set of blueprints every time.
The have a blueprint for a most efficient starting base (lay it down and build by hand), a most efficient midgame setup (build be robots) and a set of high efficiency endgame smelter arrays and so on ...
So it is a battle, who has the best blueprints loaded from Internet, instead of who is the best factorio player.
Therfore I would like to see an option to restrict blueprint import, so that only blueprints are allowed which are created in current pvp session.

I also like to have a more finished endgame.
What if you have to launch 50 rockets to get enough space science packs to research the last type of rocket the rocket with space capsule to leave the planet.
(There may be a come back button who animate a space ship landing and than let's place you a home with you family on this map to switch to endless mode.)

Thanks for all that great work ;)

Avezo
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 439
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 3:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Post by Avezo » Sat Jan 27, 2018 10:23 pm

When making new capmaign make sure to get inspiration from old C&C:RA campaigns with 'interior' maps (or from interior maps from Starcraft). I.e. part of campaign might consist of base inside of the mountain or cave or something like that:
Image

NotABiter
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 124
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2014 9:05 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Post by NotABiter » Sun Jan 28, 2018 2:08 am

TheRaph wrote:So it is a battle, who has the best blueprints loaded from Internet, instead of who is the best factorio player.
Therfore I would like to see an option to restrict blueprint import, so that only blueprints are allowed which are created in current pvp session.
The problem you describe is real but the solution you jump to is inane.

The problem, when you look at it deeper, is really not with these players or what they are doing, but with Factorio itself. The only reason these players can use the same blueprints every game is because all the games are the same. It just doesn't matter much if the iron patch is here rather than there - routing of raw materials being slightly different every game is obviously not enough to satisfy, nor should it be - it's a trivial thing.

If you want different builds, what is needed is different recipes for each item. (Different stats/properties for each item can also change how the game plays out. E.g. it might make sense to go to the highest level assembler in one game but not in another if in the first game it has 5 module slots but in the next game it only has 2. Landfill and/or cliff explosives being prohibitively expensive could also change things as then players would be much more likely to choose to build around such environmental features rather than obliterate them. Biters/spitters having different resistances every game could mix things up a bit as different weapons/ammo then get built to scale. Etc.)

The Factorio devs almost address this with the "expensive recipes" option, but ultimately fail. Instead of opening up infinite possibilities. they just changed the number of possibilities from 1 to 2.

I haven't tried them yet (as I have just now searched for and found them), but there are mods that randomize recipes (and more):
(There may be other such mods as well - if they can't be found by searching for the word "random" then I didn't find them.)

Now all you have to do is convince these multiplayers you watch that they should use such a mod.

GiftGruen
Burner Inserter
Burner Inserter
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 3:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Post by GiftGruen » Sun Jan 28, 2018 3:44 am

If you plan to develop the "Production PvP" idea further, one simple change that would (imho) make it far more challenging and strategic would be to change it so that you had to export items for them to count against your score. Or maybe the things in your base count some, but exporting a full stack of assembler 3s would give you 10x the score that simply placing and using them would.

Exporting could be handled via rocket, with both the rocket and the stack that's inside counting extra in terms of production score. Or you could both already start with a 3rd party rocket base, and you could either export there, submitting only the stacks you want to export, and getting a smaller bonus, like 3x instead of 10x, or maybe just being limited in the number of rockets that the silo can send. Just have an incentive to go for your own rocket silo and export as much as your economy can handle for the maximum score increase.

This would change PvP production significantly, as you no longer get points for simply making yourself better at getting more points (the snowball effect), but rather, for making yourself worse (in the short term). This should lead to more interesting choices during gameplay.

doppelEben
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2016 6:21 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #227 - Rendering, Trees & Scenario talk

Post by doppelEben » Sun Jan 28, 2018 7:48 am

Avezo wrote:When making new capmaign make sure to get inspiration from old C&C:RA campaigns with 'interior' maps (or from interior maps from Starcraft). I.e. part of campaign might consist of base inside of the mountain or cave or something like that:
Image

was that the one where you control tanja? in the building? <3

Post Reply

Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users