Factorio Forums

You see, we have two options:
- Do nothing and keep some people upset for a very bad reason: "Some people can't stop themselves from building casinos."
- Cut content and upset other people for a very simple and understandable reason: "The game now has less content to play with and is less fun for us."

That really just so amazing, I never see so much sophism before in few sentences.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

Do I need to explain why making people upset over reduced content is worse than making people upset without removing any content?.

Yes you have too, yes, cause you need to prove it.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question

Game with less content has less content

Not necessary, imposing limit to a game is what make a game. You want ultimate sandbox ? Go make your game in unity we watch you. Have you never hear about LESS is MORE ? Some people already point out that preventing space casino allow other form of quality to shine. Like any other game, nerf something, indirectly buff other thing. I'm not saying this is an ultimate argument, just that there is pros there is cons, stop with your sophisms.

Anyway, I read this absurd thread from time to time where as expected people just don't listen to any point, and I was literally speechless to read this, I return to the shadow.

kammerer wrote: Thu Jul 09, 2026 11:01 am The assumption that the decision has been made based on prior players feedback is our pure speculation. My feeling is that it was affected by the feedback somehow. And this is the reason why I opened this thread - the prior feedback could be unrepresentative because a lot of players were simply silent in the past (me including). I play Factorio since version 0.12 (or 0.11 if I not mistaken), and I played thousands of hours on Steam. So, it's not a beginners feedback. Perhaps it was my overlook to not participation in discussions on forums, but better late than never.

You proposed interesting alternatives. I don't mind to discuss them, but I just not sure if they are realistic since the authors intended to finish the development without deep rethinking the core mechanics. We likely will not see Factorio 2.2 anytime soon if ever.

Therefore my proposition, while maybe it was not the best one among other theoretical possibilities, is trivial and pragmatical - just bring Space Casinos as they are (or more or less like that) in the game that Wube sees as a long-standing release. It's not ideal, but if Wube don't want to rethink the mechanics too deeply, it would be better to keep nice feature as it is rather than removing it entirely.

I appreciate your moderation , there was a thread linked in the discussion where players specifically argued for the removal of the space casino. Wether the decision was made because of that is not my claim, rather it is that there exists players who opposed the space casino and gave it as feedback, so the argument claim that was made ( not by you) "devs listening feeback or not" isn't really relevant imo, since there were feedback in both directions, unfortunatly devs are bound to displease some players. I appreciate you are not acting like things are ought to you. I don't see that many players enjoying the change but maybe i'm biased x).

I realize sometimes in discussion like those on the internet are people who don't really care about the actual topic discussed but apparently enjoy more the contradiction and attention that goes along. I feel there was also some players posting their massive space casino and some notorious youtubers that voice similar disappointement about the space casino since you opened that topic which may have contributed to some players toning down a bit their critics about space casino = beginner player . That's certainly not my point.

I appreciate that your post recognize the intent of the devs and i felt the tone it has isn't the one of an ungrateful and entitled person, far from it, which is why i quoted your words again, because i feel your proposition was not really remembered, you proposed a simple setting to allow player to use space casino, maybe one that could disable achievements to preserve the balance for devs intent, but also allow a nice quirk 'without mod'.

I tried my own proposition of a asteroid crusher that would require promethium to craft and it could accept quality module, but i prefer the proposition of other players to use promethium for a receipe of reprocessing that would be available only in late game, i would be curious to hear your opinion about those, "if it was in the game" would it be "like space casino" for you, or is it missing the appeal you had in them ? or neither ? (would it be a gameplay equivalent ? same fun to design ? .... ) and also "as a mod", because from your words you seem ok without achievement, so i would suggest mod, but maybe that's missing the point.

coffee-factorio wrote: Thu Jul 09, 2026 11:38 am The feedback mmmPI consistently gave was that he could get by without rerolling. The discussions that were had, had a bar set so low he was asked to leave them. It is unfortunately a part of the discussion that presenting a giant volume of bulleted lists, half of which are wrong, indicates that we collectively are being very. Very patient. Because if someone doesn't present correct information for the side they are taking, as consistently as they do, it indicates they don't care about taking any side.
And not that the other side doesn't have something valuable to contribute. Or needs support.

You quoted the text that literally explain the concept of the platform, to show that you can always if you want upcycle your ore in space with little to no complexity, it was written 2 month before this thread actually opens, before the different changes as an anticipation. And it still hold i believe to demonstrate =>

that you don't have to build a whole factory on space, nor any kind of upcycling loop with intermediate products, a very simple design can do the trick.

You can still make space casino, they are lame and boring, (imo) given the announced change, they won't scale with research, how i could i know at the time that my demo platform would require catching more and more asteroids and not increase passively its yield with research before devs annnounced the change ?? I'm not satisfied with this, hence my participation in the whole dicussion about propositions for going further ...

If you can't bring them back exactly the same, or have a tickbox, maybe it's possible to propose things that takes into account the new things revealed in 2.1, like the platform to platform transfer and the interplanetary radar signal, to propose a path for space casino that is not "removal" , nor "exploitish/unbalanced,against devs intent".

Thank you for giving those opportunity to clarify all the times, but this is getting old and i fear it participate it bloating needlessly the public discussion, you should answer PM if you just want my attention.

When they explained removing expensive recipes, I very much got the impression that the devs want to move away from the idea of adding settings for those sorts of options and intend for them to be done through mods.

mmmPI wrote: Thu Jul 09, 2026 6:03 amLol this is the sheriff, not a single useful word on the discussion, only misattributed personnal attacks

No, you're just entitled and ungrateful. You're just the thing you're talking about is all, while you busily talk past everyone.

motmontheinternet wrote: Fri Jun 12, 2026 8:15 pm I'm just going to keep playing 2.0 until a quality asteroid chunk mod comes out, then.
The devs should be under no illusion here, the space ships making quality materials is more interesting than everything they're putting into version 2.1, and it isn't even close.

I noticed you posted twice the same message, even though it was already inappropriate the first time, is it a way to try and grab attention because your initial comment was ignored ?

mmmPI wrote: Fri Jul 10, 2026 12:08 am I noticed

This wording means you're talking past people.

motmontheinternet wrote: Fri Jul 10, 2026 2:16 am This wording means you're talking past people.

Maybe just past you ? i'm not sure what you mean there , i think i should try x) because i already answered the first time you posted the inappropriate message and in PM, and then tried to go a bit further than your "no u" . But for this i had to search for a message that wasn't offtopic and the only one you posted that was related to space casino was in another thread, i thought maybe the bitterness in your tone comes from the abscence of answer when you posted it and all this is just some kind of desperate call for attention. It's the best i can do to try and understand your behavior even though i feel it is more appropriate in PM.

There were several propositions by players , like a tickbox to allow space casino, different receipes to change the balance or the moment it would be unlocked, mods that were mentionned and linked, at this point i thought maybe your opinion has evolved and you wanted to share something more interesting about the actual thread, it was like a hint , if trying to focus on the topic is what you call "talking past you" , then i think it's the correct thing to do here.

Hurkyl wrote: Thu Jul 09, 2026 5:12 pm When they explained removing expensive recipes, I very much got the impression that the devs want to move away from the idea of adding settings for those sorts of options and intend for them to be done through mods.

That's the best and most adult route at this point. The solution is simple, https://mods.factorio.com/mod/bring-bac ... rom=search. It's been used by several people here so it's probably a good route.

There's already stuff like modded planets, I put my time into looking at how the recipes of the game worked instead. But that's like adding one puzzle when the problem is a solved puzzle disappeared. So I'd go for the simple route personally.