Version 2.0.45

[protocol_1903]

Did not expect this version to blow up. To quote Rseding from a similarly contentious bug/not bug that was fixed in 2.0.44 and reverted in 2.0.45,

This is a classic case of https://www.laws-of-software.com/laws/hyrum/ and I have no plans to change the behavior...

I guess it's time for another meeting.

[Chindraba]

Did not expect this version to blow up. To quote Rseding from a similarly contentious bug/not bug that was fixed in 2.0.44 and reverted in 2.0.45,

This is a classic case of https://www.laws-of-software.com/laws/hyrum/ and I have no plans to change the behavior...

I guess it's time for another meeting.

Based on my reading of that full quote, it seems that this might not actually be a case of hyrum at all. That which is changed was well documented, in the game and the wiki.

After listing the explicit actions which do disable achievements in general, such as console use, and exactly what will disable a delineated list of achievements, the section on disabling achievements concludes with:

Any other changes to map generation or using the debug modes does not disable achievements.

Additionally, that they have stated the intention to update the notices in the game directly further emphasises that the current, pre-2.0.45, behavior is in fact documented and defined behavior, not undocumented behavior taken to be 'standard' by usage.

If such a meeting happens, what I hope for and what I expect do not match. Like as not neither will match the final outcome.

[Jap2.0]

Thanks. My opinions on the change vary a bit depending on whether railworld is included or not.

To be extra precise on the trainworld railworld, i tested in 2.0.45 , you need to modify the preset by allowing biters to expand again, ( a tickbox) and change back the time factor from 20 to 40 (the first slider in "evolution") and then the "railworld[modified]" has no achievement locked at start.

I would like to hear your opinion if you don't mind explaining how the inclusion changes things for you.

for me, i like rail worlds for 1) they are almost peaceful, 2) the scale correspond more to the timespan of my games ; And as i don't care about achievements so i don't have a strong opinion on this, but i understand the change as making railworld much more difficult IF you want to also get all the achievements as the 1) is removed.

Right, I figured it wouldn't work in .45, I was curious if that would change in the next version along with the other tweaks mentioned/feedback given.

I don't have enough knowledge about/interest in/experience regarding the speedrunning community to have an informed or strongly held viewpoint about that.

I suppose I care more about railworld because it seems like a very intended/traditional (for lack of better words) way to play the game (again, not to demean speedrunning, I have less knowledge there). It's an included preset and has a very long history—from what I can tell presets were introduced in 0.15.0, and this style of map goes back further with RSO, Bentham's railworld, etc. It may just be the circles I've ran in, but that seems to be a pretty common style of map to use. I also think that the reduced enemy settings are balanced by further need for expansion/more spread-out resources, so I wouldn't really consider it easier.

I do sometimes just start from base settings and tweak a few to get more of a railworld resource distribution (and a few other minor tweaks), I'm pretty sure my main SA world does have expansion enabled.

[Panzerknacker]

Achievements are just, achievements. I think for them to have any value there should not be a way to cheat them, thus running anything easier than default settings. That they were incorporated into speed runs, fine. Just change the category to 80% or whatever, excluding the biter achievements.

I think the game should be developed as a normal game in the first place, not catering to speed runners that found a niche usecase for certain game behavior.

These changes are totally logical, I really hope address every single 'cheat' map setting that makes the game easier than Default.

[thedoh]

Achievements are just, achievements. I think for them to have any value there should not be a way to cheat them, thus running anything easier than default settings.

This is not what is happening. You can make resource patches as plentyful, as large and as rich as you want. You can disable biter spawners by surrounding them with pipes. "Cheating them," as you put it, is explicitly allowed, just only in ways approved by the dev team, and not in ways that that have been around for something like five major versions of the game.

[Klips]

Fixed that the achievements checks of map startup difficulty settings didn't check for pollution, expansion settings, starting area and trees.

Excuse me, why is this big of a change just randomly hiding in bugfixes? This seems like a major rebalancing of a long term precedent.

I don't understand who stands to benefit from this change either. I like to play on default settings anyway, but I did a railworld run recently, and you're telling me that save now gets locked out of a bunch of achievements? For what? What's the purpose of this? This seems like nothing but a pointless grievance.

[Quadehar]

Achievements are just, achievements. I think for them to have any value there should not be a way to cheat them

You gonna have a hard time banning all dudes afking in multiplayer games then...

[IdentityZer0]

When I personally look at the speedruns, I find more value in it, when it is at least "remotely" comparable to normal play. What I mean is, that when I play with default settings, and finish the game in X hours, I can be like, woah, it is incredible they can finish the same thing in X/10 hours or faster, really something.

But if the way they play is, that they practically turn off biters for example, so they didn't have to deal with the problems I had to, it suddenly is something very different.

This could theoretically be applied also on things like resource generation, but I would say it is where I draw the line for now. Playing with more resources makes the game easier, but it doesn't completely remove some part of the gameplay.

So, essentially what you are saying is that your way is the only way to play a sandbox type game. I want you to use all of your dev tools and try and complete a 100% speedrun in one game session. Tell me how long it takes. Factorio owes a LOT to the speedrunning community as you are well aware since you invited a bunch of them to the closed LAN pre-SA.

Arbitrarily deciding how people can play is like saying "Ukraine can end the war any time by stop fighting."

[mmmPI]

Right, I figured it wouldn't work in .45, I was curious if that would change in the next version along with the other tweaks mentioned/feedback given.

Make sense, unfortunatly i don't expect default railworld that doesn't have biters expansion to also allow combat related achievement.

I don't have enough knowledge about/interest in/experience regarding the speedrunning community to have an informed or strongly held viewpoint about that.

I have never seen anyone try to speedrun on railworld and i do watch speedruns some times, but my knowledge is limited ^^I think those are a little separated things which in the best of world wouldn't have to negatively impact each other.

I suppose I care more about railworld because it seems like a very intended/traditional (for lack of better words) way to play the game (again, not to demean speedrunning, I have less knowledge there). It's an included preset and has a very long history—from what I can tell presets were introduced in 0.15.0, and this style of map goes back further with RSO, Bentham's railworld, etc. It may just be the circles I've ran in, but that seems to be a pretty common style of map to use. I also think that the reduced enemy settings are balanced by further need for expansion/more spread-out resources, so I wouldn't really consider it easier.

I do sometimes just start from base settings and tweak a few to get more of a railworld resource distribution (and a few other minor tweaks), I'm pretty sure my main SA world does have expansion enabled.

I really do feel the same for the first part as the first thing i tried to learn after getting the demo was train signals, and that's what convinced me to buy the game x). I played a lot of peaceful no-biters games. It only recently that i've felt more interested in ways of dealing with increasing amount of biters.

That might sound like heresy to 100% speedrunners, but i wouldn't mind / i would understand achievements that would be "win the game in deathworld" or "win a railworld" because i feel as if it's "one of the intended way to play" a bit like in some game you have achievement to "win with every factions" and that is not something doable in a single run and "force"/"propose" to players different experience/playstyle than what they would have gone for naturally. MMO RPG or RTS have classes and factions-reserved achievements, that's my universe of reference

I do find railworld easier because i found them less punishing if you are slow, and the way i learned to play the game was by taking my time and going slowly so i would understand/expect the restriction of achievement in railworld for the reason of "easier" as it would align with how was explained the change. But i see how it could just be the "class" of "faction" / "type of achievement" that suit best my instinct/playstyle.

Achievements are just, achievements.

Obviously they are not, they are also important references that structure the speedrunning community. Thanks you for always removing all nuances in your intervention, it makes it easier for everyone else x)

You gonna have a hard time banning all dudes afking in multiplayer games then...

no this is default behavior in most multiplayer game, there is a setting for this

[Loewchen]

So, essentially what you are saying is that your way is the only way to play a sandbox type game. I want you to use all of your dev tools and try and complete a 100% speedrun in one game session. Tell me how long it takes. Factorio owes a LOT to the speedrunning community as you are well aware since you invited a bunch of them to the closed LAN pre-SA.

Stating your opinion on any change is fine. Highlighting the impact for you and people who play like you is also fine. The idea that you get to dictate what can be changed and what not is not fine.
There are millions of people who bought the game and all any of them get to demand is that the devs make the game they want to make, you don't get a veto.
You also don't represent the speedrunning community, neither in the matter nor in tone.

[Haionde]

We all kept quiet while you were fixing your mistakes, what are the smart belts worth, but don't touch the speedrunning community, they are a huge part of the viewers and popularizers of your game, you made a mistake, it's time to admit it and roll back the changes. 100% speedrun is one of the most interesting things you can watch on twitch, they create blueprints that others can't, you kill thousands of hours of the most creative and smart people, whose ideas are then transferred to others, they are the drivers of the process, listen to them

[perptual_kllr]

Hi.

I have a comment that's outside the speed running discussion. Just a normal person like 99% of the other players.

I started a new save a while back with more trees, water, and a larger starting area. I'm not using mods. I want to earn achievements. I've purposely set up my game to enable that. I get a little bit of a greener map, and a little more time to deal with the enemy.

I'm 160 hours in. This change is going to make it so I can't earn achievements anymore on this save? Really?
And I only know about it because I happened to glance at the bugfixes in the changelog?
How many players just wont realize their achievements are disabled and its been so long that now they cant downgrade to <45?
Will there at least be a popup that says 'The map gen settings used in this save will prevent achievements - 'Ok' or 'Disable updates and get no new features/fixes'?
Why not just have a condition in the code that checks which version a map was created on so that existing saves are not invalidated? Or something else that does makes it so only new saves are affected (if date > ... etc)?
Is a bugfix the best way to communicate this change?

Apologies if these questions have been addressed - the discussion is becoming emotional and difficult to follow.

[FilthFaKtory]

Not trying to oversimplify the discussion but it seems speed run categories should just be decoupled from in game achievements.

Yes, it's really easy to get attached to '100%' as a speedrun category, but is that really what's important? Completing *every* honestly arbitrary achievement?

The 100% achievements runs in 1.x are spectacular and are a true testaments to the quality of the game and the players. The fact that "but biter combat didn't happen" does diminish them at all, in fact I would argue makes them better, more streamlined and purer.

And non of that should end just because the dev thought it "felt weird", and the best part is it doesn't have to.

Call it the "100% no-combat" category, or something better, whatever works. I just think that's a better way to go about it. In my opinion: "more categories is more better" and you can quote me on that!

Many games have speed run categories that don't necessarily align with game designer intent is totally fine.

[thedoh]

The 100% achievements runs in 1.x are spectacular and are a true testaments to the quality of the game and the players. The fact that "but biter combat didn't happen" does diminish them at all, in fact I would argue makes them better, more streamlined and purer.

It is a common misconception that we don't fight biters in 100%. In fact, you might be surprised to learn that fewer biters and spawners die in default settings than in 100%, by a very large margin. In Nefrums's 2h19m12s default settings world record from 1.1 (since you mentioned this version), he kills 892 small biters, 887 small spitters, 196 medium biters, 13 small worms, 9 spitter spawners and 6 biter spawners (a total of 2003 entities). In AntiElitz's 4h12m54s 100% world record (also from 1.1) he kills ~2800 small biters, 448 small worms, 372 biter spawners, 343 spitter spawners and 75 medium worms (~4038 entities).

My 100% 4h30m54s record for vanilla 2.0 had: 4100 small biters, 526 biter spawners, 525 spitter spawners, 443 small worms, 213 medium worms (5807 entities).

Which is more avoidant of biters? It is default settings by a wide, wide margin.

[_CodeGreen]

I'm reading over this thread, and something I'd like to point out regardless of opinions on whether or not the change should be reverted, is that mods disable steam achievements. So sure, you could technically unlock achievements with mods, but the second you disable mods you lose all of the achievements you got with them enabled. Modded achievements and Vanilla achievements are tracked separately, so the "solution" is not as simple as just installing a mod.

This change retroactively affects all players who update the game, unbeknownst to those who don't read the changelog, which frankly is probably most people. It doesn't matter what the change is, how big it is, or whether or not 100% is still possible, this change is disastrous for the average player who has been playing up to this point. At the very least, saves that were created before the change should not be affected, as you've already seen the few people who have reached out in this thread saying their hundreds of hours of playtime in a single world have now gone completely to waste.

[mmmPI]

they are the drivers of the process, listen to them

When listening to the speedrunners that gave their opinion in this thread, you can read not all of them are opposed to the change.

I'm 160 hours in. This change is going to make it so I can't earn achievements anymore on this save? Really?

No, you can still earn achievements on the save, just not all of them, considering some of them require you to finish the game in less than 40 hours, those were already locked away from the save anyway, it's even possible nothing additionnal is locked by the change, you can actually already see for yourself if you have upgraded to .45.

And I only know about it because I happened to glance at the bugfixes in the changelog?

That is the purpose of the changelog ^^,you can also read about it on the official forum or reddit, and you can also know about it in game when you look for the achievements menu, which i imagine is how most player learn about achievements anyway, and it was announced that in future version, you'd get a notification when creating the map.

How many players just wont realize their achievements are disabled and its been so long that now they cant downgrade to <45?

Around 242, that's not a serious answer but the question cannot be answered otherwise apart saying most player don't play with the "experimental" but the "stable" version and so there's no way to know if they'll ever be impacted by this particular 0.45 change or not.

Will there at least be a popup that says 'The map gen settings used in this save will prevent achievements

yes that was announced in this thread

Why not just have a condition in the code that checks which version a map was created on so that existing saves are not invalidated? Or something else that does makes it so only new saves are affected (if date > ... etc)?

probably because it's not worth the trouble although that wasn't said in this thread, that's just my guess.

Is a bugfix the best way to communicate this change?

I would have definitly prefered the usual horseman bringing a personnal manuscript note to my place with some chocolates and the FFF, but alas, they're out of horseman currently

The 100% achievements runs in 1.x are spectacular and are a true testaments to the quality of the game and the players. The fact that "but biter combat didn't happen" does diminish them at all, in fact I would argue makes them better, more streamlined and purer.

It's not a fact that "combat biter didn't happen" in 100% run, it was mentionned in this thread, and if you watch some runs, and if you know how the game was at released and how it evolved. Trying to help in your attempt at not over-simplifying the discussion. Here it's more subtle than that.

[Panzerknacker]

Also, since many things are changed in 2.0 anyway (like removal of rocket control units), making 1.1 runs incompatible with 2.0 runs, wouldnt it be better to stick with 1.1 anyway for this 100% category?

Then with >2.0 we have the real deal achievements, which will better for the game, as you can read in kovarex's great explanation.

[mmmPI]

Speedrunners : some of us are wary that the change could destroy the 100% run category

Also, since many things are changed in 2.0 anyway (like removal of rocket control units), making 1.1 runs incompatible with 2.0 runs, wouldnt it be better to stick with 1.1 anyway for this 100% category?

Then with >2.0 we have the real deal achievements, which will better for the game, as you can read in kovarex's great explanation.

Aka Wouldn't it be better if the 100% category was removed from space age and people just stick to no space age 1.1 for speedrun in 100% ?

The question cannot be more disingenuous i think.

[Avocado]

I know it was stated earlier by someone, but my particle update time has increased by 1.5-3x (.700 to 1-2.8ms now) with this version. A little investigative work has narrowed it down to the new particles for the Gleba plant destruction by agricultural towers. I have maybe 40 agricultural towers on Gleba. I cut power to them and my particle update immediately dropped back to update 2.044's update time. Could the new particles perhaps get a optimization similar to asteroid particles where the game wont use cpu cycles on particles not currently being displayed? Like if I am viewing Nauvis, the game is still using cpu to update those particles on Gleba even though I am not viewing them.

[mmmPI]

I know it was stated earlier by someone,

Are you sure ? it seem the opposite was stated on this thread, that particle update time decreased and perfomance was improved so it'd be interesting to compare the save game that causes opposite behavior i thought.