Quality level names poll

[MeduSalem]

About mods: Yes, I bet one of the first genuine 2.0 mods would be the feature I'm requesting. To avoid wasted time with name discussions and duplicated effort with creating, installing and managing mods, I'm proposing this for inclusion in the vanilla game.

Adding the ability to name things the way you want in vanilla, even if it may be the most flexible solution, is going to be the least likely implemented solution to the situation however.

Because it opens a whole can of worms for maintaining and discussing the game. Discussing anything quality related, even for bug reports, may become confusing and difficult. Add localization ontop of it for the full "Tower of Babel"-experience. And the devs would have to take the responsibility for clearing up any confusion that may arise from that because they allowed it in the first place.

If a player changes the way things are named with a custom localization mod, then that is the player's own responsibility.

So I also say, leave that stuff rather for a mod.

[Qon]

I wholeheartedly agree with the substance of your arguments.

If I'm right, then I'm right. But if you can see that I'm right then I can listen to what you have to say.

However, I find your response marred by unnecessary hostility and toxicity, which is disheartening to read. I am inclined to believe that Wube wouldn't truly condone posting in this fashion.

Well Koub is reading this board as well (Hi!). He is on your side, internally debating himself if it has gone too far or not.

I'm trying to cut through the bullshit. Maybe I was too hard. But I think you also misunderstood me:

"trash", "silly idea", "it's stupid" and "your opinion doesn't matter," resorting to sarcastic remarks.

I'm trashing the idea, none of my comments have been about any person here. I haven't said that anyone here is stupid, stupid ideas can get their grip on smart people as well that just don't have the experience necessary. And stupid people aren't automatically bad people anyways. People should identify less with their ideas and not take criticism against an idea as an attack against their ego. Not everyone has matured that far though, so I could probably be even more clear on exactly what I'm attacking and who I'm not attacking?

And I didn't say "your opinion doesn't matter", I was speaking in general about opinions and people who hold despicable opinions you would agree isn't valuable. That was the sweeping kind of point I was responding to.

It seems evident to me that the individual proposing this idea may lack an understanding of game design, UX, or modding intricacies. They may not yet realize that the extension points for customizing those names already exist in the form of mods with translations, for example. The tone employed in your reply appears more dismissive than instructive, failing to encourage constructive dialogue or reflection on opposing viewpoints. It comes across as belittling and derisive, using phrases like "trash", "silly idea", "it's stupid" and "your opinion doesn't matter," resorting to sarcastic remarks. If you've already decided to spend your time explaining the "whats and whys," I believe you may as well spend a bit more effort on improving the way you communicate it, so that the other party can both learn from it and feel respected. If the intention is merely to chide, then... is there even a point in replying?

I don't want to hold back criticism of an idea, that sounds boring and also dangerous if taken to the extreme. We aren't fighting about the people with the remote, we are putting our robot-ideas in the arena and letting them fight each other with us safely at a distance.

Also, you and others seem to get my points and agree that it's a terrible idea, so there was a point. But maybe I'll remember to tell people to put only their ideas in the arena and to not put their egos in there as well.

> Offending unreasonable people is a good thing because you try to use your emotions as weapons. It doesn't work on me.

Going with that logic, whacking people who disagree with you (i.e. people who in your opinion are "unreasonable"), e.g. on a religious level is... encouraged and a sign of working in good faith? Thereof I think the lack of this kind of "contribution" would be more beneficial to this community than its presence...

I am disheartened to witness instances where a community that I once perceived as welcoming, inclusive, and conducive to mutual learning is tarnished by unwarranted animosity, lacking displays of empathy.

As to not fuel any more drama, I will be leaving it at that and won't be responding anymore.

I was attacking an idea, and someone tried to shield the bad idea with their ego and emotions:

You, on the other hand, have no other argument than "it's hilariously silly". I consider this rude, offending, no help, and no argument at all.

The reason I don't spare egos throwing into the arena is because otherwise any stupid idea can have an impenetrable shield and you can't have any productive discussion at all. But if I don't let it work on me then people might learn to discuss the topic instead. Or their ego, thrown in front of an attack, might get destroyed. But it's not really my responsibility to save everyone who try to get hurt on purpose.

So with that I hope you continue to feel welcome, that I might get slightly better at communicating that I target the idea and not the person and that we can get back to the topic so Koub doesn't have to moderate this thread.

[mmmPI]

Here is a CONSTRUCTIVE proposition that i think will make everyone agree :

Every factorio player, past or present be given a unique token alongside the copy of the game, something like a NFT, so that one cannot make any copy and it would be unique. This would be a first step toward guaranteeing a fair vote for any subsquent proposition. But then to make it fairer for players that play a lot, there would be a time tracking for each token that would be reset every week. And every week the time played of the previous week could be transformed into vote tokens with a prorata if you are playing multiplayer or not, because you could get some points deducted if you are reported a lot. Same thing if you play and you don't click a lot you don't get the same amount of voting tokens to avoid people letting their computer run overnight to get more voting rights.

Those vote tokens you could then use to bid for a share of a smart-contract attached to a name list. This would allow hopefully players to come up with lists of names by themselves similar to how political parties are making proposition and only then people vote. I think if you don't have enough vote token , then it's a bit like if your opinion doesn't count because you don't play the game or you are toxic in multiplayer. Only a certain investment of vote token would be necessary to propose a list of name, to avoid dispersion and non-serious proposition.

There may be something to say about players that are toxic on the forum,at this point and could get some vote token deducted, but it would require players to identify with their vote token account on the forum. So still some work to do, but if should be a matter of month not more to set up. It could be one of the first proposition put to vote.

I think to give a fairer chance to all propositions, the most convenient way of doing would be to make several rounds of vote, not just one. Ideally something like a vote every month, the 3 or 4 of the month is good to me, but it can be put to vote, in case there is no consensus or in case both end up being a sunday. Each vote would serve to determine which names are to be used for the following month, nothing complicated.

Now every week there would be another vote, like a preliminary vote, where every player could choose their favourite 3 list of name amongst a selection of proposed name list. A certain threshold of approval could be required to qualify for the monthly vote, i thought of about 20% but that may be changed after further debate if need be. Obviously it would also be forbidden to run the same list more than once in a month, and no player could vote for more than a list everyweek. I don't know if it's better when players are or not allowed to vote for their own list , or one for which they put some vote tokens into. So that could be up to vote or further debate.

I think also that the devs proposition should be given more consideration than the players proposition, because they seem to know the game pretty well. So their original list of name would come up every season, for a seasonnal extra vote, it would have a special effect, to only be active certain time per day, say 1 hour per day, it's the devs original name that are used in the game if they won the vote, on top of the week in which they automatically participate.

I know some of you will may be thinking that there is a flaw in the system, if no list reach more than 20% during 4 week in a row, there would be no monthly vote to be held ! And you are correct ! That's not a flaw, that's by design to reduce the complexity of the system. In such case, everyone keeps its voting credits, and the name of the previous week keep rolling. If there is a need to change what is established it would require at least 20% vote together for change. ( But as i said that 20 % can be debated in case there is no consensus ).

The way people can make their own list of name has not as many rules than the voting system itself, it's up to everyone to organize so that it is possible to verify that submited propositions were only issued by players in possession of enough voting tokens. I thought of something like 100 hours of play time in the month and you are allowed to propose a name for the level 1 quality, every week of the month if you play 200 hours, you can propose a name or the level 2 quality and have 1 vote token to select the name of the quality level 1 for every week.

Now if you play 300 hours or more in the week it start getting interesting because you could start trading your vote tokens. You'd be allowed to propose a name for quality 3 too, but if you don't want, you could trade 2 weekly vote associated with quality 3 name, to instead be allowed to vote one week for a quality 4 name. And so you could decide also to trade 2 quality 4 vote for a quality 5 vote, that would be monthly.

I think also there should be some random voting token distributed every month, because people like RNG. But it shouldn't impact the overall system so it would only be at the quality 1 or 2 level that it happens. And those freetoken couldn't be traded for higher quality vote, maybe unless you played 1000 hours the month, or you hosted a multiplayer server. Since you'd gather 10% of players vote token. Unless there are mods in it, then server host would have to share 5% 5% i think.

I think it may be a tad convoluted but it covers most angles right ?

[XT-248]

I am inclined to believe that Wube wouldn't truly condone posting in this fashion. It seems evident to me that the individual proposing this idea may lack an understanding of game design, UX, or modding intricacies. They may not yet realize that the extension points for customizing those names already exist in the form of mods with translations, for example.

I have a background in programming, and from what I understand of localization and how it works.

The effort to make this feature is trivial; I mean, look at how easily players are re-creating officially Space-Age-announced features in a janky, unsupported manner. What is not trivial is picking the right words or tone to convey the same meaning from English to another language.


Here is the thing: every company might treat translation/localization efforts differently. Still, from what I do know for certain, Factorio officially supports text/UI in thirty languages; WUBE is working on the expansion Space-Age, which requires translation/localization; the translation/localization may be happening as we are posting here for all I know; we have a large community full of people who are more than willing to offer their services for translating; and WUBE developers are non-native English speakers.


We might disagree on several things about Factorio. Still, I think I know enough to know that this is a practical solution that can be implemented either at the release date or afterward.

I am disheartened to witness instances where a community that I once perceived as welcoming, inclusive, and conducive to mutual learning is tarnished by unwarranted animosity, lacking displays of empathy.

As to not fuel any more drama, I will be leaving it at that and won't be responding anymore.

I agree that the tone from others has gone in a non-constructive, low-quality direction.

Adding the ability to name things the way you want in vanilla, even if it may be the most flexible solution, is going to be the least likely implemented solution to the situation however.

Because it opens a whole can of worms for maintaining and discussing the game. Discussing anything quality related, even for bug reports, may become confusing and difficult. Add localization ontop of it for the full "Tower of Babel"-experience. And the devs would have to take the responsibility for clearing up any confusion that may arise from that because they allowed it in the first place.

If a player changes the way things are named with a custom localization mod, then that is the player's own responsibility.

So I also say, leave that stuff rather for a mod.

Quality mechanics come with icons on items.

The translation/localization would not impact the difficulty of recognizing a quality-boosted item in screenshots/reports.


Translation/localization works by checking the file for a list of all 'String' for a particular language that Factorio is configured to run in and then storing it in memory at runtime. Then, when the UI element comes up, it is %String_Ugly_Internal_Name_For_Iron_Plate or local::getIronPlateName(), which refers to 'Iron Plate' from the localization file while using English but might appear as something else in Germany.

Short of a mod conflict with the base game's localization files, very little can go wrong.

[Koub]

[Koub] I do read this thread, albeit with a little latency : can't be moderating h24, I have a life of my own. Moderating did itch me a lot, but I decided to resist despite the tone that was displeasing me. If the form keeps bothering me past this post, I will take my scissors out and moderate backwards until I reach what I consider is acceptable, but I'd rather I didn't have to, so take notice.

[ChefOfRamen]

For my 2¢, you could add options for quality names, but the vast majority of players won't touch them. On top of that, the default names will act as the "canonical" names for quality tiers that you would have to use when talking about them with others. So the defaults would still be important. (not to mention this would be a really weird thing to have settings for)

As for my comments on T1 being "basic", yeah, I didn't consider that the quality name would only appear in the context of other quality names. That makes me able to approve of it somewhat. I'd still prefer "standard", though, because that implies that it's mass-produced (which, for a Q1 item, it probably is).

[Gergely]

Here is a thought. Have we actually seen any suggestions that most of us can agree are better than the one the developers went with?

This is what they are using currently:

• Normal
• Uncommon
• Rare
• Epic
• Legendary

I personally don't like the fact it references a particularly... problematic part of the video game industry. I can't help but associate this with collectibles, loot boxes, skins, artificial item rarity in video games and so on. The cheeky business practices. Factorio is nothing like that. Factorio never goes on sale. Factorio never had a X.99 price. No kovarex, I didn't think this was amusing. It only feels out of place. But this is a very subjective opinion of mine.

I would also prefer one that sounds more industry like. Something that fits in nicely with the Factorio universe and feels right at home. For me this is not about liking specific other suggestions better, I just dislike the current tier naming and I think the developers can do better.

[XT-248]

For my 2¢, you could add options for quality names, but the vast majority of players won't touch them. On top of that, the default names will act as the "canonical" names for quality tiers that you would have to use when talking about them with others. So the defaults would still be important. (not to mention this would be a really weird thing to have settings for)

The thing about "canonical" names is that most people who voted in the poll disagreed with Wube's 'canonical' name scheme.

As of the time of this post, the poll results are: First most popular pick -

• Basic
• Improved
• Superior
• Exceptional
• Perfect

Second most popular pick -

• Normal
• Standard
• Precise or Precision
• Excellent
• Flawless

I have some issues with the above uncanonical name schemes, but they are an improvement over the 'canonical' name scheme.


You can not expect the wider Factorio communities to agree on what makes a 'best' design for whatever (beacons or none, what to use for logistics and how to do logistics, spaghetti or main bus, etc.).

What makes you think the entire Factorio community will agree that the 'canonical' name scheme is the best way to name the quality levels? For example, I refuse to use the 'canonical' name scheme and will refer to them as Q1 to Q5 instead.

[ChefOfRamen]

...isn't the whole point of this poll to select new canonical names for the quality levels? Because players didn't like them?

[surfcrone]

I'm fine with literally any quality codes, from just colored dots, to industry standard Normal<->...<->Legendary, to differently striped pantsu icons.

[Khagan]

Those still posting on this thread might like to be pointed at the run-off poll at
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=111779
which has the set of top choices from this poll as one option.

(Thanks to FuryOfTheStars for reminding me to make this public service announcement.)

[TROPtastic]

TL;DR

A quality naming system that replaces the fantasy/lootbox-inspired "legendary" and "epic" naming with the following levels derived from real-world gemstone grades:

• Fair
• Good
• Very Good
• Exceptional
• Perfect

What?

I've been kicking this around for a while, and I was prompted by today's blog post to finally make a post on the forums about it. Months after its reveal, the proposed names for the Quality system still don't look right when juxtaposed with the well-crafted industrial environment of Factorio. A better naming system is one that comes from the real world that people created to grade gemstones by rarity and value.

Why?

Most of the feedback about the current quality names has been vocal disapproval from those who think the names don't fit with the carefully designed art, environmental storytelling, and world-building of Factorio. Feedback in defense of the names has mostly been along the lines of "this isn't a big deal" or "meh, I can live with the names", which isn't a ringing endorsement.

Switching to these proposed names would lose nothing in clarity from the current system, but it fits much better with Factorio's theme as a fairly grounded automation game. As a bonus, this real-world grading system includes two of the most popular options from a naming scheme poll on this forum. You might say "this changed system sounds more boring than the current system," but I can assure you that real-life production engineering is rarely "epic" and never "legendary"

[Koub]

[Koub] Merged into the quality poll thread.