Peak Factorio 17.79 and the hot mess of .18 and 1.0/1.1

Post all other topics which do not belong to any other category.
Henderikus44
Manual Inserter
Manual Inserter
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2022 8:10 am
Contact:

Peak Factorio 17.79 and the hot mess of .18 and 1.0/1.1

Post by Henderikus44 »

In my opinion Factorio 17.79 was "Peak Factorio", everything after belongs in the garbage and ought to be set on fire.
Please allow me some of your time to offer an interesting perspective on this awesome game.

Keep in mind I am not referring to engine improvements or performance improvements and other technicalities of that or similar nature.
With that being said, lets get started.

The general trend of degradation of this game happened of course with the redesign of oil. Giving basic oil refining only petroleum gas compared to the greater and more realistic approach of all oil products in the refining process upon first unlocking fluids and oils processing. From a meta-physical level this is an extraordinary change to make. If you would like to pin-point a historical event as the start and catalyst of the downfall of Factorio, the oil recipe change is it.

This change resulted in a "mini-meme" on public and private servers online of the likes: "Noobs cant oil", "Noil" or "New players cant".
In the FFF's before and after the oil change a rational was presented by Wube that this oil change was necessary to "smooth out the learning curve" or in other words "make oil (and early tech) more accessible to players". Why though? Where did this mind-virus come from?

It can easily be said that the underlying rational has to do with the de facto assumption of player retention. An economic philosophy, originated from casino's, implemented and refined by Blizzard for World of Warcraft and now copy-pasted throughout the "gaming industry" and becoming a trend which plagues modern gaming to this day. But Factorio does not work with a subscription model, nor does it sell cosmetics or engages in season passes or other (financial) trinkets and transactions. Then of what importance is the economic philosophy of player retention in the mind of Wube headquarters?

The alternative on the other hand, if player retention is not the head motive for the massive chain of changes in Factorio, is ease and accessibility. This philosophy however might even be more dangerous if not thoroughly analysed and understood by its initiators. Ease and accessibility is synonymous with common denominator or "catering to a common denominator". All television shows, movies, news agencies, magazines, advertising agencies, AAA game studios, sport events, social media companies etc etc cater to a common denominator; namely the literary and mental capacity and understanding of a "theoretical defined" 16 year old (male/female) with average IQ (100).

Everything in static, passive or interactive media is created so it can be understood by this "fictional" 16 year old IQ100 m/f.

In summary we have two trains of thought: The economic theory of player retention and the psychological theory of common denominator captive audience.
And this is where it gets interesting, keep these theories in mind and look at the history and development of Factorio.

Factorio pre 17.79 can poetically be defined as: "Here is a mountain, have fun climbing it."
Factorio post 17.79 (.18 and onwards) can poetically be defined as: "Hop in this taxi and enjoy the ride."

Speaking of .18, 1 and 1.1:

You can hear this taxi ride in the sound design.
You can see this taxi ride in the color correction and color filters.
You can see this taxi ride in the Icon design.
You can feel this taxi ride in the general world atmosphere.
You can feel this taxi ride in the tool tips and help items.
You can sense this taxi ride in the technology tree and changed recipes.
You can see the embodiment of this taxi ride in the spidertron.

Its the mountaineers that are the foundation of Factorio, not the 16y100IQ taxi passengers.

With the new DLC coming up, I would like to say:

Wube give us that dark, unknown mountain and screw these darn taxi passengers.

Thanks guys! Have a good day.

aka13
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 384
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 1:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Peak Factorio 17.79 and the hot mess of .18 and 1.0/1.1

Post by aka13 »

A good shitpost, but literally zero arguments except "muh basic oil". It was just annoying to redesign oil processing, and I have simply always rushed advanced as fast as I could, without setting up proper basic processing.
Nowadays I still rush advanced, but at least I don't get bored while at it.

Science became way harder and more annoying, old science with alien packs was easier, an I liked it more - it was faster and easier to setup, and I could concentrate my time on my mall, trains, grid, defences etc. Nowadys 90% of the time before you build all science packs is spent on science packs and smelting more and more to get acceptable science rates. Instead of "plop down science fast" it became "your factory revolves around science". I don't even want to mention the science changes between the versions.

UI changes, tooltips, icons, colors have been a godsend and have been consistently changing to be better.
Don't know when you came to the game, but I have been around since the very beginning. It was no dark unknown mountain, it was a mess, where you had amazing ideas and great potential, a raw gemstone with impurities.
Starting out with the game, for a very long time it was that you had to work your way past the gui, the graphics, and everything else, because the base gameplay loop was so satisfying.

If you play on deathworld marathon, reaching all 5 science packs at acceptable values takes about 50 hours nowadays, if you plan everything out and make it proper.

The only thing where I am letdown and disappointed, since Reactors were added, they remain safe, boring and basic, where even ic2 in its old times was more interesting.

In all other aspects the game has been growing, fleshing out mechanics and getting prettier and more interesting to play.
Pony/Furfag avatar? Opinion discarded.


Koub
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 6794
Joined: Fri May 30, 2014 8:54 am
Contact:

Re: Peak Factorio 17.79 and the hot mess of .18 and 1.0/1.1

Post by Koub »

Henderikus44 wrote:
Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:48 am
[...]
OK boomer.

I'm not saying the current Factorio is perfect. There are a few things I wished different, but on the other hand all the rest is awesome, and the game would have probably been so much worse if I - or you I guess - had been the lead game designer. Overall, the game became better at each version. Most things went the right direction, while only very few didn't.

[Koub] BTW and this is the moderator-me speaking : I sense a very high potential of flame war on this thread. The kind of bots vs belts or pre vs post 0.17.60 oil. If my intuition is correct and it does degenerate, it will be locked without further notice.
Koub - Please consider English is not my native language.

Tertius
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 182
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2021 5:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Peak Factorio 17.79 and the hot mess of .18 and 1.0/1.1

Post by Tertius »

I'd like to answer from a perspective of a player who started Factorio in March 2021, with some 1.1.x version. According to Steam, I played Factorio for 983.9 hours since then.

Your most important point is oil, because you mentioned it first and with 2 paragraphs.

On my first walkthrough, I didn't know anything. I placed 2 refineries and 1 or 2 or 3 chemical plants. It wasn't enough, so I added more. The challenge wasn't the oil recipe, it was pipe handling. It was the time where I learned how to use pipes. Learning pipe usage is the major point of basic oil processing for new players.
The next level (which unlocked very soon) was advanced oil processing, and I had to rebuild everything. Having advanced oil processing later is the second and final step in learning how to use pipes. It's a good learning experience and learning curve. This is the gameplay aspect of the two oil processing modes.

On all of my next walkthroughs, I used self designed oil factory blueprints. They are all fully functional with both basic and advanced oil processing. You just switch recipes. This is the aspect of advancing technology. You start blank and evolve. This is the real world aspect of the two oil processing modes, which can be found in many layered mechanics like the different armors, ammo, assembling machines, even inserters and belts.

Your next major point is player retention.
Does basic oil processing limit my progress through the game? No, it does not. As advanced player who knows how to build efficient research infrastructure, the time required to unlock advanced oil processing after basic oil processing is so short that my basic oil plant was not yet outgrown. It still provided enough resources to my growing factory. Advanced oil processing was just unlocked in time to be able to continue with the same refineries - it provided just double the output with the new recipe.

I played an MMO or two the last 15 years. I know what player retention mechanics are - commonly described as "grind" by the players and as "progress mechanics" by the developers. Factorio doesn't have one single player retention mechanic. Factorio actually contains a progress mechanic that guides the player through the several technologies. It doesn't limit or stall the player, it guides him instead. This is how real progress mechanics should be in the first place. You can see this very clearly, because as advanced player you research new tech faster than you are able to use it. The time required to grow your factory is longer than the time required to research the tech you're growing your factory for. At least this is how it turns out for me.

And you can start a game in sandbox mode with all tech unlocked. At your first walkthrough, 1 minute after you bought Factorio.
No, there is no player retention mechanics. This is one of the most pleasant aspects of Factorio ever.

If it comes to the taxi ride, well, I like a game to be pleasant to play. I like polished games. Polished games like Factorio are a pleasure to play. In the end, I play games for recreation and entertainment. I don't want to be grieved by incomplete or inconvenient UI or by tedious and unbalanced game mechanics. I don't want to grind, I want to play. I know there are players who advocate rough and tedious and inconvenient gameplay which they call "challenging". Honestly I don't understand them. The challenge in a game is the story or the mechanics as they were designed, but not having to deal with its shortcomings. They mistake a games' shortcomings with challenging mechanics.

As a new player, I consulted the wiki very often to learn how some item works. Sometimes I looked through the item history, and I was always glad that I got Factorio as version 1.1. It all made sense. Changes always made the game better balanced as a whole. It just put all the parts fit together better, update by update.

There are still shortcomings in Factorio, but they are not within the gameplay design. It has (small) annoyances with the UI mostly. But if you seek a challenge and want to change your experience, go to all the settings you are able to change at map creation.

As closing words, I'd like to mention my MMO experience again. If there is an update in an MMO that will change your favorite character build, so you are not able to continue with your super uber destroyer build, you need to get along with it. Get along with it. Yes, get along with it. After an update, the previous game is gone without a trace. Irrevocably. Any energy you invest in your salted protest in the forum is wasted and better spent with just getting a new build for your character and continue to have fun.

After the update is before the update, so instead of protest you need to make suggestions for improvement, seen from the current state of game. Don't mention the old times. Take the current game as if it were never any different and make your suggestions from that point. The main question is always: how to make the game better, seen from the current state of the game. Look forward, not backward.

orzelek
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 3900
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 10:20 am
Contact:

Re: Peak Factorio 17.79 and the hot mess of .18 and 1.0/1.1

Post by orzelek »

It might be slightly tangential to the discussion but since pipes were mentioned above:
I think that we reached a point where pipes should behave like belts in terms of way of building and direction management instead of current connect to everything behavior.

This would make building and managing pipes much more intuitive for someone who needs to start on oil processing since they would have prior experience with belts already.

aka13
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 384
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 1:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Peak Factorio 17.79 and the hot mess of .18 and 1.0/1.1

Post by aka13 »

orzelek wrote:
Sun Jan 16, 2022 7:37 pm
It might be slightly tangential to the discussion but since pipes were mentioned above:
I think that we reached a point where pipes should behave like belts in terms of way of building and direction management instead of current connect to everything behavior.

This would make building and managing pipes much more intuitive for someone who needs to start on oil processing since they would have prior experience with belts already.
I'd shoot to protect pipes as they are. Pipes are not belts, and that's amazing, because they are not belts. It's a nice change, and a completely different set of problems and solutions, rather than belts.
Pony/Furfag avatar? Opinion discarded.

FuryoftheStars
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1251
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 2:01 pm
Contact:

Re: Peak Factorio 17.79 and the hot mess of .18 and 1.0/1.1

Post by FuryoftheStars »

aka13 wrote:
Sun Jan 16, 2022 10:02 pm
orzelek wrote:
Sun Jan 16, 2022 7:37 pm
It might be slightly tangential to the discussion but since pipes were mentioned above:
I think that we reached a point where pipes should behave like belts in terms of way of building and direction management instead of current connect to everything behavior.

This would make building and managing pipes much more intuitive for someone who needs to start on oil processing since they would have prior experience with belts already.
I'd shoot to protect pipes as they are. Pipes are not belts, and that's amazing, because they are not belts. It's a nice change, and a completely different set of problems and solutions, rather than belts.
I agree, though I do often wish for one way valves for unpowered flow control (and yes, I do use the Flow Control mod :) ).

astroshak
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 520
Joined: Thu May 10, 2018 9:59 am
Contact:

Re: Peak Factorio 17.79 and the hot mess of .18 and 1.0/1.1

Post by astroshak »

One-way valves have a proper name, you know : Backflow Preventers.

Many pumps, IRL, do NOT function as a backflow preventer. Centrifugal pumps (the best kind of pump for high flow rates) can suffer from backpressure pushing the fluid backwards through them. Positive Displacement pumps don’t tend to suffer from this issue, but are not really good for high volume flow rates.

Pumps in this game function both as a pump (sucking from the inlet side and pushing to the output side) and a backflow preventer (preventing flow in the other direction). I for one do not mind the need to run power to such a combined device, even though backflow preventers that I’ve worked on all required no power at all to function.

Necronium
Burner Inserter
Burner Inserter
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2021 8:35 pm
Contact:

Re: Peak Factorio 17.79 and the hot mess of .18 and 1.0/1.1

Post by Necronium »

Thats a long ass post about something that you can just shorten to I dont like oil so game is bad. I rereaded this 2 times and still cant understand what is a problem with current oil?

FuryoftheStars
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1251
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 2:01 pm
Contact:

Re: Peak Factorio 17.79 and the hot mess of .18 and 1.0/1.1

Post by FuryoftheStars »

Necronium wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:09 pm
I rereaded this 2 times and still cant understand what is a problem with current oil?
Long discussions transpired about that already. If you check out the oil mod in my sig (same one linked to in second reply), the discussion tab there has links back to relevant threads on the subject back in the day (saying that makes me feel old... >.> ). I don't know if more threads popped up on it or not after as I decided to take a break from this game for a while at that point....

Necronium
Burner Inserter
Burner Inserter
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2021 8:35 pm
Contact:

Re: Peak Factorio 17.79 and the hot mess of .18 and 1.0/1.1

Post by Necronium »

FuryoftheStars wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:46 pm
Necronium wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:09 pm
I rereaded this 2 times and still cant understand what is a problem with current oil?
Long discussions transpired about that already. If you check out the oil mod in my sig (same one linked to in second reply), the discussion tab there has links back to relevant threads on the subject back in the day (saying that makes me feel old... >.> ). I don't know if more threads popped up on it or not after as I decided to take a break from this game for a while at that point....
Remeber that there were some topic about it and just went to thread about FFF with that change, to remember what was all of that about. Most of those comments after reading 10 pages was that they liked old and they dont want change cause they will need to rebuild base.

I remeber that my problem with change was that refineries with BOP didnt have fixed output so I didnt remember which fluid had I/O but that was later resolved.
So my question still stands valid what is still wrong after those 2 years. Im playing modded game now so I dont remember vanilla recipes but there wasnt any problem with them.

FuryoftheStars
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1251
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 2:01 pm
Contact:

Re: Peak Factorio 17.79 and the hot mess of .18 and 1.0/1.1

Post by FuryoftheStars »

Necronium wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 7:59 pm
FuryoftheStars wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:46 pm
Necronium wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:09 pm
I rereaded this 2 times and still cant understand what is a problem with current oil?
Long discussions transpired about that already. If you check out the oil mod in my sig (same one linked to in second reply), the discussion tab there has links back to relevant threads on the subject back in the day (saying that makes me feel old... >.> ). I don't know if more threads popped up on it or not after as I decided to take a break from this game for a while at that point....
Remeber that there were some topic about it and just went to thread about FFF with that change, to remember what was all of that about. Most of those comments after reading 10 pages was that they liked old and they dont want change cause they will need to rebuild base.

I remeber that my problem with change was that refineries with BOP didnt have fixed output so I didnt remember which fluid had I/O but that was later resolved.
So my question still stands valid what is still wrong after those 2 years. Im playing modded game now so I dont remember vanilla recipes but there wasnt any problem with them.
For me, it's always been about the over simplification of the recipe (pre-0.17.60, it outputted rough equal amounts of all 3 fluids, 0.17.60 changed it to Petro gas only) and the ripple effect it had down the line. It also resulted in some techs being pushed around (many pushed later, for example, anything dependent on lubricant) and other requirements/subsequent recipes being changed (example, flamethrower ammo being changed from half & half light/heavy to pure crude). I know the primary reasoning behind the change was because too many people were having issues dealing with the 3 fluids. I still believe this was (in part) because the devs put too high of a demand on one, while leaving the other two with barely any outlets. I've never liked many of those changes, but I was in a minority, so, I created a mod. Two mods, actually (the sulfur one in my sig, too).

Tertius
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 182
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2021 5:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Peak Factorio 17.79 and the hot mess of .18 and 1.0/1.1

Post by Tertius »

It's interesting to see all the references to old game versions and old discussions mentioned. But from the perspective of the current state of the game, nothing of that is relevant. It's history. It's irrelevant if or how old blueprints can be used or not, or if some factory has to be "refactoried" to match the current state of the game mechanics, given the beta character of the old game. A game in beta is expected to get changed until it is mature. If you cannot deal with that, don't use beta software.

Remove all blueprints, delete all old saves and forget any old game experience. Now start a new game and ask yourself: how can the game be changed to get an improvement? This is relevant. If you want your old blueprints and your old saves, load an old game version.
As far as I see it, people don't want to adapt, because they are lazy, and will complain because of that. They don't actually complain about the change itself.

The OP asks for a challenge in the upcoming expansion. He wants it rough. That's fine, although his reasoning doesn't fit.

FuryoftheStars
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1251
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 2:01 pm
Contact:

Re: Peak Factorio 17.79 and the hot mess of .18 and 1.0/1.1

Post by FuryoftheStars »

Tertius wrote:
Wed Jan 19, 2022 1:15 pm
It's interesting to see all the references to old game versions and old discussions mentioned. But from the perspective of the current state of the game, nothing of that is relevant. It's history. It's irrelevant if or how old blueprints can be used or not, or if some factory has to be "refactoried" to match the current state of the game mechanics, given the beta character of the old game. A game in beta is expected to get changed until it is mature. If you cannot deal with that, don't use beta software.

Remove all blueprints, delete all old saves and forget any old game experience. Now start a new game and ask yourself: how can the game be changed to get an improvement? This is relevant. If you want your old blueprints and your old saves, load an old game version.
As far as I see it, people don't want to adapt, because they are lazy, and will complain because of that. They don't actually complain about the change itself.

The OP asks for a challenge in the upcoming expansion. He wants it rough. That's fine, although his reasoning doesn't fit.
Not sure if any of that was directed at me, but my arguments have never been about old base/blueprint compatibilities.

netmand
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 302
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2017 1:20 am
Contact:

Re: Peak Factorio 17.79 and the hot mess of .18 and 1.0/1.1

Post by netmand »

This game did have a polished and finished feel in beta, but changes in beta are likely to happen. The changes that were made were acceptable in my opinion. The original post is just some rant about an aspect of the game that becomes irrelevant after the game progresses into mid-game where we are starting to make utility science packs.

I also got lost about the poetic taxi ride; maybe that was a cultural comparison my American mind doesn't comprehend.

User avatar
ssilk
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 12750
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 10:35 pm
Contact:

Re: Peak Factorio 17.79 and the hot mess of .18 and 1.0/1.1

Post by ssilk »

netmand wrote:
Wed Jan 19, 2022 5:21 pm
I also got lost about the poetic taxi ride; maybe that was a cultural comparison my American mind doesn't comprehend.
Also have problems to understand that, even that I have an European mind. I think what he means — and I can follow that thought for a while — is that the current version feels sometimes a bit like one-person shooter, where you walk in this kind of way/tunnel you can see around — eventually very far — but you cannot leave the path. (I don’t remember the right name for this type of gameplay.)

Well, yes. You’re thrown into this kind of unknown unknowns. That feeling you get, when you explore the world and the map reveals in front of you and suddenly you feel how vast this land is and how dangerous it can be to make on wrong step. Parts of that feeling has been thrown away with the progress of the game over the years.

Yes.

But it was needed. To make Factorio a financial success. To ensure further development. And so on. And it is only for vanilla Factorio so.

Install mods and you get this feeling again. Where is the problem?
Cool suggestion: Eatable MOUSE-pointers.
Have you used the Advanced Search today?
Need help, question? FAQ - Wiki - Forum help
I still like small signatures...

User avatar
jodokus31
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1397
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 4:13 pm
Contact:

Re: Peak Factorio 17.79 and the hot mess of .18 and 1.0/1.1

Post by jodokus31 »

This person posted one post like a bomb and ran away.
Best to ignore it!

Molay
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 167
Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 8:01 am
Contact:

Re: Peak Factorio 17.79 and the hot mess of .18 and 1.0/1.1

Post by Molay »

I regret reading that long winded post, and resent you, OP, for pretending you'd bring forward concrete reasoning but then did not.

Yes, oil is easier to get into, the UI improved a lot and the graphics changed a tad. What that has to do with player retention beats me, why would you even bring that up? You point out yourself this is not a life service game.

I'm just genuinely confused by that whole post and its premise that ease of use and accessibility are a negative. Your allegory of climbing a mountain vs taking the taxi is nothing but masochism and possibly some self-imagined elitism. It's akin to shitting on modern programming languages because they are easier to work with and more accessible than assembly; having a modern tool that assists you and makes your work more efficient should be welcome, not reviled. Such are the UI and oil improvements, the newer, better iteration.

One such accessibility feature the train stop limits for example; yes you could dedicate yourself to approximate it with much tedious work before, or you could use mods to achieve a similar effect, but the 1.1 brought not only a feature that makes the game more accessible, but also more versatile with the degree of complexity remaining the player's choice.

If there is indeed such a downfall as you imagine, spend less time on poetry and more on giving concrete examples. As it stands, it looks like a slightly more ambitious than average shitpost, but a shitpost nonetheless.

Henderikus44
Manual Inserter
Manual Inserter
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2022 8:10 am
Contact:

Re: Peak Factorio 17.79 and the hot mess of .18 and 1.0/1.1

Post by Henderikus44 »

aka13 wrote:
Sun Jan 16, 2022 10:21 am
A good shitpost, but literally zero arguments except "muh basic oil".
It is not about oil.
Koub wrote:
Sun Jan 16, 2022 2:20 pm

OK boomer.
Ad hominem and not an argument.
Necronium wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:09 pm
Thats a long ass post about something that you can just shorten to I dont like oil so game is bad. I rereaded this 2 times and still cant understand what is a problem with current oil?
It is not about oil.
FuryoftheStars wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 9:39 pm
I know the primary reasoning behind the change was because too many people were having issues dealing with the 3 fluids.
This is exactly the primes of my post.
ssilk wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 7:50 am

But it was needed. To make Factorio a financial success. To ensure further development. And so on. And it is only for vanilla Factorio so.
Install mods and you get this feeling again. Where is the problem?
If that is the case then my argument stands: Factorio was dumbed down and made more colorfull to appease an audience of 100IQ 16 year old minds for financial gain.
jodokus31 wrote:
Thu Jan 20, 2022 11:23 am
This person posted one post like a bomb and ran away.
Best to ignore it!
Hi.
Molay wrote:
Fri Jan 21, 2022 3:01 pm
I regret reading that long winded post, and resent you, OP, for pretending you'd bring forward concrete reasoning but then did not.

I'm just genuinely confused by that whole post and its premise that ease of use and accessibility are a negative.
Its hard to debate taste.

Mods like Bobs and Angels, Py, Krastorio, Space Exploration have in total millions of downloads. A large portion of the Factorio player base wants more complexity and less ease of use. The number of downloads of said mods underwrite this statement. Yet the direction Factorio went after the Oil change is "making the game more simpler and easier to understand". To use my allegory, the Mountaineers are those people that like to play those mods, that build mega bases, that funded the kickstarter, that played through all versions etc etc. The taxi passengers in that sense, are the people that want easy games, pretty colors, tips and tricks, fancy sounds and a well written tutorial and all those other trinkets, they play 50 hours, launch a rocket and leave.

One reason for developing Factorio was, if I am not mistaken, that Minecraft was too "simple" and had no "production". Hence me mentioning the spidertron, its the ultimate convenience vehicle.

There is enough earning potential in the Factorio base that wants more complexity. If the upcoming DLC is going to be fancy things instead of more complexity then my statements and arguments will be validate. I am trying to make this as understanding and objective as possible.

Post Reply

Return to “General discussion”