Factorio Forums

Hey,

I love this Blog.
It's not just Factorio updates but it's very connecting with the Devs.
The Problems they face and the thoughts they have for weeks or Month
about Problems in game or Managing decisions.

I don't have WoW but I used to play it in 2012 on a Friends Account
and we would sit together and level this Character together.

I didn't even know they put this Level balancing thing in...
Not being able to enter a Zone because your Level was to low
and finally reaching this milestone was the best feeling of accomplishment.

I like that you want to keep the Belts the way they are.
You can build them very fast but it's still a thing that needs to be done.
Using Blueprints and robots you have everything you need.

Keep it up. I always enjoy the Posts and I think I'm not alone

Greetings,
a usually quite quiet blog reader.

I find the idea of the devs not wanting to make the game too easy to be somewhat humorous. You have magical bots that build everything for you in one click of a blueprint. The idea that this magic base-in-a-box with blueprints you copied from a youtuber is also so stringently associated with "hardcore players" making "megabases" is humorous even more. I also have a sneaking suspicion that the kinds of players who would assume the "real game" doesn't start until you get bots are also the kinds of players who play with biters disabled; which virtually removes 100% of the challenge from the game, it just becomes a waiting game at that point. Your super base is an inevitability. What actually is the gameplay loop for such players? Does one exist?

Every time I think about getting bots and blueprints I am left wondering what game is there is left once you get automation. Its not like there is anything to figure out, every bit of production line is already figured out and the blueprint is already made and you can't improve upon it. The idea that the game doesn't START until this point, tells me that what people get out of factorio is vastly different. For me playing with bots and blueprints is like playing a game where defeating the last boss gets you the best gear. It makes no sense because there are no enemies left to use that gear on. Terraria had this problem.

I dont disagree that too much QoL and convenience can make the game less fun, but Factorio is one of those games where the end game is basically creative mode and its not addressed at all, yet we have people arguing about whether a "belt tool" to make straight belts is too convenient or not. That is quite the head scratcher to me.

Because people get vastly different things out of the game and view things as QoL or 'hardcore' differently means that deciding what to improve and what not is a tense proposition. I am sure glad modding is a thing.

Congratz on 0.17!

Factorio, in a lot of ways, is a puzzle game. Obviously, if you use someone else's blueprints, it's akin to cheating ( though not as bad as in a puzzle-only game, and it's not like there isn't a very large variety of puzzles to solve even if you "cheat through" some of them...)

proclion wrote: Mon Sep 30, 2019 8:20 pm

Deadly-Bagel wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 9:47 pmBelt planner, on the other hand, would allow you to just throw a bunch of machines down and plan belts between them. There is none of that original "solve" of the puzzle so it would actually detract quite a lot from the game. It would also encourage players to be lazy with their designs, which isn't in the spirit of the game.

I have never seen any "puzzle" aspect to belt layout in any of the games I've played. It's always been a tedious "I need to get from HERE to HERE, I will take the most direct route, snaking around and under anything I can to get there". If there's any puzzle to be had it will be well before you've researched robots, when you're in your first or second game.
Do you have an example of a real-game "puzzle" aspect to belt placing that takes place after construction robots are researched?

Getting that research that lets you automate tedious shit is incredibly rewarding.

The second level of the puzzle starts when you start to consider throughput in a cramped scenario...

Mechazawa wrote: Tue Oct 01, 2019 4:44 am I also have a sneaking suspicion that the kinds of players who would assume the "real game" doesn't start until you get bots are also the kinds of players who play with biters disabled; which virtually removes 100% of the challenge from the game, it just becomes a waiting game at that point. Your super base is an inevitability. What actually is the gameplay loop for such players? Does one exist?

As someone who plays with Biters enabled but tries very hard to not ever place anything manually (long live the Construction Drones mod!) I feel I can answer this.

Without your brother coming in and kicking them apart, what actually is the gameplay loop for Legos? Without people trying to shoot it down, what is the gameplay loop for a model airplane? What's the gameplay loop in Cities: Skylines for that matter?

The answer is simple. Here's the gameplay loop in all of these situations:

1. Think of something to do using the tools provided.
2. Do it.
3. Goto 1

That step 1 is likely what you are not taking account of. You want the game to give you a reason. Not everybody wants that. Your way to play isn't wrong, but neither is theirs/ours.

I kind of straddle the line. I like having to deal with biters, but I don't like them forcing my hand every other eyeblink. I want to play the game my own way but I want some roadblocks.

Mechazawa wrote: Tue Oct 01, 2019 4:44 am (...)
Every time I think about getting bots and blueprints I am left wondering what game is there is left once you get automation. Its not like there is anything to figure out, every bit of production line is already figured out and the blueprint is already made and you can't improve upon it. (...)

There's blueprints and there's blueprints. A factory set up to serve one purpose (e.g. make green chips from one complete belt of copper and half an iron belt), does not meet my requirements when I need just X green chips. There's differences when I start using beacons on them (do I want maximum speed, maximum efficiency, minimum pollution or some trade-off). Do I need it modular (so I can place just enough for a certain output or do I want it to consume a certain input)? How modular do I want it? Do I use belts a lot or do I prefer direct insertions, thus in the extreme going from ore to final product with a minimum of belts and trains?

These optimizations are the fun. And figuring out them myselves. Of course I also look at some other blue prints. And I see what people play and build on the MP servers I play on. But... one surely can do better? Or not? That's the fun! For me at least.

5thHorseman wrote: Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:35 am

Mechazawa wrote: Tue Oct 01, 2019 4:44 am I also have a sneaking suspicion that the kinds of players who would assume the "real game" doesn't start until you get bots are also the kinds of players who play with biters disabled; which virtually removes 100% of the challenge from the game, it just becomes a waiting game at that point. Your super base is an inevitability. What actually is the gameplay loop for such players? Does one exist?

1. Think of something to do using the tools provided.

To expand a bit on @5thHorsemands very good explanation: To me factorio is a planning/desining game. Enemies are just a time waster preventing me from designing factories, i don't understand why anyone would leave them enabled. (Disabling enemies in Minecraft was actually the first thing i did when i started playing that.) From what you say i guess you get no fun from designing a really neat assembly line that fullfills all of your self-imposed constraints (space efficiency, energy efficiency, ups efficiency, etc.)? Some people have compare factorio to designing computer chips. You have to deal not only with logistic routing but also with routing bandwidth, delay, errors, production capacity etcpp. And most people who actually built a 1kSPM+ base say that the puzzle is very different at that scale. Construction bots only automate the placing of stuff, not the planning. Like using Photoshop™®☮ to draw a picture and then printing it out - would you tell that person they should've used brush and canvas because Photoshop isn't enough of a challenge? Ofc if you just copy your whole base from the internet then yea...what's the point. I also find that Logistic Bots auto-solve the logistic puzzle, so "what's the point" on that one too. What you percieve about the biters as "challenge" is to me just boring repetive action.

I fully support what 5thHorseman and eradicator wrote and like to add:

Factorio is not only about efficient/elegant/optimized designs (like Lego) but also about getting there. Not only aren't the technologies available in the beginning to build a fully beaconed '000/min whatever-setup right from the start, you also don't have the stuff to build it. However optimized your first green circuit layout is, it won't be your last one.

This means that you have to find a way to your "final" design (if such thing exists), which is a puzzle all by itself. This is why it took me 3 starts to launch a rocket when I started with Factorio. (Because I got lost in Spaghetti the first 2 times.) And then this same thing happend to me when I started with Bob and Angel.

Compared to this, IMHO, the aliens are a mere nuisance that challenge you by distracting your attention. Factorio makes a trivial tower defense game.

eradicator wrote: Tue Oct 01, 2019 9:34 am

5thHorseman wrote: Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:35 am

Mechazawa wrote: Tue Oct 01, 2019 4:44 am I also have a sneaking suspicion that the kinds of players who would assume the "real game" doesn't start until you get bots are also the kinds of players who play with biters disabled; which virtually removes 100% of the challenge from the game, it just becomes a waiting game at that point. Your super base is an inevitability. What actually is the gameplay loop for such players? Does one exist?

1. Think of something to do using the tools provided.

To expand a bit on @5thHorsemands very good explanation: To me factorio is a planning/desining game. Enemies are just a time waster preventing me from designing factories, i don't understand why anyone would leave them enabled.

I also find that Logistic Bots auto-solve the logistic puzzle, so "what's the point" on that one too. What you percieve about the biters as "challenge" is to me just boring repetive action.

I felt a bit concerned by Mechazawa's remark and thought the ongoing reactions to it very on point. I play mostly with biters disabled now, it wasn't the case for the first 2 years i play this game i liked the challenge of managing them, but at some point it feels repetitive unless you use mods to add flavor, but quite soon you adapt to an AI and it feels repetitive again.

I also play RTS and civilization a lot, there is a challenge playing versus other fellow humans, not against "bot"s or "AI" , at least past a certain time investement into a game. I see a parralel here.

Then you have city-builder game, like the old pharaoh, caesar , or even a simulation like the rollercoaster tycoon, city skyline, those games when i play i feel like using lego , it doesn't require someone trying to shoot at it to be fun. It feels like a drawing board, or just a pen and paper, you can draw/write anything you want, the limit is your imagination !

I have stopped playing any MMOs for a few years ( to have time to do something else). what was called "real game" in the remark could be translated this way IMO :

In a MMO first you gear up, lvl up, learn abilities , and learn the game. Then you reach max level, and the game usually is different. Some people wants the best gears and it's sometimes a neverending farm depending on the game, some people will start doing PVP and just do that. Some people will start over a new character to explore new mechanics, some games are designed for adding new content at the end ( for which veterans race ) .


This very much depend on the philophy of the game, and the success in implementation. Sometimes one thing is thought by devs to have X impact, and really players uses it differently, or abuse it, or ruin their fun because of it.

Those several points link up to this : the QoL things, like the belt brushing, or the "maybe-overpowered" robots, why not instant blueprint, modded achievement on steam, and such, would/could ruin the fun for people who play a MMO up to max level and then start over with a new character, this would be seen as an in-built power-lvl tool, for people who consider the game is all about leveling up and gets bored or dislike after that.

Those on the contrary would be very good improvement for people playing MMO only to pvp other groups of people with their friend( moba/battle royal style), you drop on the tedious lvl-ing up aspect, and the repetitive grinding vs bots or mobs, and you jump straight up into the fun, the big wars and raids and whatever. They would consider the gearing up and lvling up part as just a prelude to the "real game".

There is a relation between "what people think the game is" , and "what the devs wants to make", it is not always a 100% match, the "developer over-control syndrom" was mentionned several times in previous discussions following FFF, given the heated discussion on bots and belts , ( for logistic ) or oil and bots ( for construction bots) i think it is difficult for the devs to act in a way that pleases everyone.

One could see it in a MMO where some people feels like there is not enough HL pvping and wants the newcomers to reach the latest stages faster to make a more populated server for wars ( at the cost of player not knowing how to use their character because the leveling required no effort ) , and some people feels like their accomplishment of lvl-ing up is stripped away from them as " it is given for no effort to anyone in less than a week these days" ( you get the idea).

It can be strong divergence of point of view/interests , though one coud keep in mind that In a MMO players are potential RIVALS, or at WAR, or ENNEMY sharing the same world, which is not the case in factorio each person is free to play the game as a drawing board, it will not spill excess ressources in a common market and ruin the farm of other people that would get mad, it will not changes the prices at an aunction houses , it will not make leaving or entering a town an annoying waste of time/super fun battle, it will not devaluate the strengh of an old classe compared to a new one and so on.

Mechazawa wrote: Tue Oct 01, 2019 4:44 amI am left wondering what game is there is left once you get automation[...]
It makes no sense because there are no enemies left to use that gear on. Terraria had this problem.

For me the first hundred hours of terraria would be finding fighting techniques, getting better at the controls, learning how to build arenas, automatic farms, adding mods with new ennemies, new bosses.
Today i always plays with 2 characters, one that uses cheats i use as a builder to make castles and spaceship and forest or dragons, clouds and aliens, or whaetever, imagination is the limit ! , the other one i spend wayy less time on it, just to explore the builds and actually "play the game" , the problem for me in terraria is that there is not enough QoL for builders, or drawers, i had more fun creating adventure map than playing them for example.

Factorio feels like learning techniques, and then using them to draw things, there are many techniques, because the game has a lot of content, but there are even more things to draw, because people have such wide imagination ! in my last game i used a modpack that included Dectorio, i spent several evenings experimenting ,digging up concrete to plant trees, testing different texture to make nice alleyways in my spagueti base, and i liked it no less than when i watch hundreds of little trains carrying things all over the place in perfect order, or in a functionnal chaos.

bobucles wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 12:25 pm Fun doesn't always mean easy. Sometimes bashing your head against the wall can be fun, too. The journey is just as important as the destination.

I do share this but i feel it is open to multiple interpretations :

I like the "sandbox" aspect, and often find myself regretting that the game is only about making a factory and not a whole town/planet, so i build factories that look like several small villages that grows organically.

The journey in that case would be "building" and the destination " a nice thing".

Building would then need to be "fun" "engaging", "ergonomic" or so.

the belt planner ( that i wouldn't personnaly use ) , instant blueprint, creative mod, would then be necessary tools to make the journey pleasant.

By that i mean the "challenge" is to manage the constant unbalance between villages, ( self imposed logisitic puzzle for personnal reason that's what makes me bash my head against the wall and enjoying it ) , the belt laying part of it is of lower importance in this context it would compared in a RTS scenario where in some games you move a whole army in a click, in some other you are expected to micro each invidual units, you would prefer one RTS over another wether you prefer moving 100 armies accross a galaxy and managing the whole supply chain of fuel and replaceable part or maintenance or 100 men accross a battlefield and their indiviual moral, health condition, personnal skill.

In factorio that would translate into having different "scale" of puzzle, wether it is a macro or micro puzzle. Some macro puzzle are more fun for some people some micro puzzle are funnier for others. And also not everyone consider the same thing a puzzle, and not everyone consider the same thing, "micro" / " macro" .

Hiladdar wrote: Mon Sep 30, 2019 7:24 pm

Factory Overlord wrote: Mon Sep 30, 2019 1:43 pm I just want to say your Assesment of World of Warcraft analogy of "LFG" is horrifically wrong.

...

Round Wheels were a bad idea, because before they were made people were healthier as they had to walk around everywhere and they "Treasured" their small adventures to the outside world more.

Veterans start grouping with non-veterans. Depending on the content, that is not a disaster but even beneficial for all, and there are may reasons why. One reason would be they are just friends inside or outside the game and enjoy hangout with each other. One reason would be to mentor the less experienced player to a higher level of play. Another reason would be just to find out how good that player is and what they know. Some of those LFG what were invited to veteran groups, in the future would eventually end up as friends or even association members of elite veteran associations. Long standing servers or games, after the initial Honey Moon period start loose players due to attrition, and retiring veterans need to be replace.

When I look at Factorio, I do not see an MMO. I do see a game that can be played cooperatively, with much more of a Player Verses Environment PVE element and smaller less persistent servers, than any MMO I have played. If Factorio is played by several at the same time on the same server, running VOIP software connecting to a server via Discord, Ventrilo, Teamspeak, or Mumble will the the way to go. I don't think LFG would make sense for Factorio, since any arraignments and passing of server connection would probably be coordinated outside the game.

Hiladdar

That isn't true, like I said all you need to do is look at existing games that do not have LFG System.
Warframe is a great example

Terralyst content came out more than 1 year ago.
People are still wanting people with 100+ kills only for doing Hydralyst runs.

New players rarely have a chance of every even attempting to get 1 kill, let alone 100.
Not having an LFG system provides absolutely 0 advantages and only disadvantages.
It is one of those "found memories" that is completely misremembered for how bad the system was.

Blizzard even made a post about the phenomenon when Classic Beta cameout.
Many people were reporting "bugs" that were actual features in classic.
https://kotaku.com/world-of-warcraft-cl ... 1834864959

Essentially they are misremembering everything.

-----

The post it self is True but a bad example was picked.
RNG drops on the otherhand would have been a much better example.

People Hate RNG - because they can't get the item they want when they want it.
But at the same time they feel immense satisfaction after they do get it and watching others attempt to get it.

Warframe though found a great solution which would make both worlds happy.
It introduces 3 mechanics to obtain items

1. Trade
2. Purchase
3. Grind

Essentially solving the problem by multiple routes to obtain a weapon or frame.

Factory Overlord wrote: Tue Oct 01, 2019 1:38 pm That isn't true, like I said all you need to do is look at existing games that do not have LFG System.
Warframe is a great example

Terralyst content came out more than 1 year ago.
People are still wanting people with 100+ kills only for doing Hydralyst runs.

New players rarely have a chance of every even attempting to get 1 kill, let alone 100.
Not having an LFG system provides absolutely 0 advantages and only disadvantages.
It is one of those "found memories" that is completely misremembered for how bad the system was.

I had the opposite experience: I played guild wars (1) more than 5 years after its last content update. I was a total noob at games. A guild of veterans watched me getting lost, invited me, showed me around, helped me level and went on dungeon runs with me. I spent nearly a year with these people, playing and having fun, appreciating that they were taking the time to teach me. Such a "commitment" doesnt exist when a LFG feature allows you to find a new group any time you want.

Mechazawa wrote: Tue Oct 01, 2019 4:44 am ...players who play with biters disabled; which virtually removes 100% of the challenge from the game, it just becomes a waiting game at that point. Your super base is an inevitability. What actually is the gameplay loop for such players? Does one exist?

I've played f.e. vanilla marathon deathworld and seablock (which has only some island of worms and no direct threat).
First one is a challenge regarding biters and pollution (the real challenge?), second one is a challenge regarding designs and managing byproducts.
Both were enjoyable and i'm likely to say, that i enjoyed seablock (bob's and angel's) more. (no logibots, instead LTN)

Was seablock a waiting game? Absolutely not, even the start can be optimized by strategic decisions
The questions were:
- What is the most important thing to do?
- What do I need for the next science pack, what are the dependencies.
- If I produce product X, which byproduct I have to deal with. Are there other ways to produce it more efficiently or with better byproducts?
- What are the bottlenecks?

The question was never:
- What do i need to survive? (actually, I don't need it.)

Heavy QoL and/or cheats would not disturb this challenge too much

But I can understand, that it's not everybody's cup of tea.
I also don't get myself into serious vanilla megabasing, although it's a big challenge, which is much more than just copy/paste of the same stuff

A lot of people said a lot of stuff so I wont quote everyone, but the jist I get is that a lot of people are into the creativity of making the base itself at end game. I can get that, I love creating visual art and all it is is adding/subtracting pixels on a virtual canvas. I guess I dont view factorio as a creative game really, unless you are using machines to make CPUs and stuff (similar to redstone in minecraft). However, unlike minecraft or cities skylines, aesthetic isnt really a thing in factorio. I guess someone could, if they wanted, make an argument that you can design the layout of the base in different aesthetically pleasing ways, but it doesnt seem the same to me as building a castle or a sky scraper in minecraft or building a virtual New York in cities skylines. Also, some future patch/mod that adds residential and commercial aspects to factorio would be amazing, just sayin.

However, my original point was about things being over/under powered. Something can't be "creatively overpowered", so I dont think creativity can really be considered part of the gameplay loop in this way. If we say its all about creativity and making a cool base then sure, bots et al arent OP, but neither are belt planers or what ever else. I dont associate being creative with "overcoming a challenge", but I do consider gameplay to be "a means to overcome a challenge", so when I said what is the gameplay at end game when you have all of these tools that do everything for you, I guess I should have said what is the challenge. I can understand figuring out ways to accomplish your goals is the challenge, but, and maybe its just me, if I already know that a game is solved then its hard for me to justify doing anything else unless my goal is to be ineffecient. Though, to be fair, I have never played factorio with the goal of being efficient, and I have also always considered myself to be playing the game "the wrong way" (but I just didnt care). My favorite way to play is with extra biters, always night, and no bots. The fun is getting to the point where stuff is automatic, and then promptly starting over.

To comment on the LFG stuff, I found in classic people didnt communicate any more than they do in retail WoW, the game play experience is virtually the same.... unless you already had a group of friends, but then everything is funner with friends so that really doesnt count. People are just as silent and non-interactive in classic as they are in retail. So, I too agree that the LFG point wasnt the best example. Lol. What I enjoyed most about classic is that it takes longer to get progress, in ten hours in retail I would be level 60, in ten hours in clasic im...10. My current character (which is admittedly still a lowbie) has like 10+ hours /played and is level 10. but for those ten hours it was nothing but nobody responding to party requests and waiting for people to stop cherry picking quest mobs. I enjoyed the slow pace but the community interaction was exactly the same as retail. I stopped playing because path of exile had an update, so thats a completely unrelated thing lol.

I like where your head's at with this post. I do agree, some non-zero amount of frustration and hardship is worth it in games - Unknown Worlds CEO Charlie Cleavland recently gave a talk about the lessons he learned making Subnautica, and one of them was that. "A little bit of frustration is good, but not so much that you drive a player away".

In light of that, I think that your blurb about "solving the belt puzzle" is something I have an opinion on:

Frustration is fine, but not forever. If I could count up the number of seconds I've spent rotating belt parts to get them to line up exactly where I want, I think I would be really sad at the life I wasted doing it. The problem with leaving belts alone is that there aren't any current upgrades to them you can get down the line - messing with getting the curves just right and running them up here and around and through tight spots is part of the game, but there's opportunity here to make it more intelligent and a little less frustrating mid-to-late game.

The most frustrating part of belts for me has been corners, so I would implement some kind of draggable belt upgrade. Call it "Smart Belts" or something, whereby when I have a belt selected and drag it with mouse1 held down, it follows curves as if I'm drawing with a pen, and orients them accordingly.

This preserves belt puzzles but removes one of the more frustrating parts of it.

Locane wrote: Wed Oct 02, 2019 5:07 am I like where your head's at with this post. I do agree, some non-zero amount of frustration and hardship is worth it in games - Unknown Worlds CEO Charlie Cleavland recently gave a talk about the lessons he learned making Subnautica, and one of them was that. "A little bit of frustration is good, but not so much that you drive a player away".

In light of that, I think that your blurb about "solving the belt puzzle" is something I have an opinion on:

Frustration is fine, but not forever. If I could count up the number of seconds I've spent rotating belt parts to get them to line up exactly where I want, I think I would be really sad at the life I wasted doing it. The problem with leaving belts alone is that there aren't any current upgrades to them you can get down the line - messing with getting the curves just right and running them up here and around and through tight spots is part of the game, but there's opportunity here to make it more intelligent and a little less frustrating mid-to-late game.

The most frustrating part of belts for me has been corners, so I would implement some kind of draggable belt upgrade. Call it "Smart Belts" or something, whereby when I have a belt selected and drag it with mouse1 held down, it follows curves as if I'm drawing with a pen, and orients them accordingly.

This preserves belt puzzles but removes one of the more frustrating parts of it.

I see a huge difference between
a) the game solves the puzzle for you, and
b) the game supports laying down stuff.

The best examples are the ways the game helps you to place power poles or underground pipes. In both cases, the game povides QoL placement tools and that's it.

I would like to see such a tool for belts. Specifically
a) auto-rotation when dragging a belt around a corner, and
b) ability to "drag" muliple parallel belts.

There's already a mod that auto-rotates the belts for you, but it misunderstood what I was trying to do so often that I just ended up disabling it. (SO I'm suspecting that it's much harder do do right than it looks.)
You can already drag multiple parallel belts, albeit only as ghosts. (Which is probably fine, you'd have to play on very specific settings to lay a lot of them before you're able to get conbots...)

----

A huge difference between WoW and Factorio is that Wube's legal team won't come after you if you host a modded server !
So I'm sad when features that open other ways of playing are removed to the point that it's not possible to mod them back in :
- Pickaxes/Melee weapons as distinct items with durability
- Mining hardness
- Armors with durability
While they probably have no place in vanilla, the three of them together meant that a "survival" style game was interesting to play, as that you had to make choices over which of the items were worthwhile to use or not depending on the situation : it was worthwhile to handmine some ores but not others, you had to pick the right armor for combat because otherwise getting hit you would just waste resources for naught, which also meant that melee was a good option in some situations but not others, etc...

BlueTemplar wrote: Wed Oct 02, 2019 7:49 am
So I'm sad when features that open other ways of playing are removed to the point that it's not possible to mod them back in :
- Armors with durability

Where do you get that from? Only thing that was changed about armor is that we added the possibility to have infinite durability.

it was worthwhile to handmine some ores but not others,

That's possible with mining/resource categories.

The problem with removing stuff that made the game good when trying to improve it has to do that the Developer don't understand what is the attraction of the game. Computer games is so diverse and can have totally different stuff that makes them good/interesting/engaging/fun...
I think Wube always have understood why Factorio is good. For me one important aspect is that it's simple to build complex stuff. The mechanics of progression when building a factory is also important so giving us everything at once is a bad idea. I feel that it's at a good spot and more QOL stuff is a pure improvement of Factorio even if it can be a determent to other games.
If the games start to feel to easy increase the complexity of the build needed and make harder puzzles to solve not more grinding and annoying build mechanics.

In the case of an belt building tool I am afraid it will be mostly annoying it's already fast and simple to build straight belts, and it will probably mostly make it harder to build stuff like balansers and beltweevs...
Something that could be done is something like the belt brush mod that builds several parallel belts at once.

Mechazawa wrote: Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:01 am However, my original point was about things being over/under powered. Something can't be "creatively overpowered", so I dont think creativity can really be considered part of the gameplay loop in this way. If we say its all about creativity and making a cool base then sure, bots et al arent OP, but neither are belt planers or what ever else. I dont associate being creative with "overcoming a challenge", but I do consider gameplay to be "a means to overcome a challenge", so when I said what is the gameplay at end game when you have all of these tools that do everything for you, I guess I should have said what is the challenge. I can understand figuring out ways to accomplish your goals is the challenge, but, and maybe its just me, if I already know that a game is solved then its hard for me to justify doing anything else unless my goal is to be ineffecient. Though, to be fair, I have never played factorio with the goal of being efficient, and I have also always considered myself to be playing the game "the wrong way" (but I just didnt care). My favorite way to play is with extra biters, always night, and no bots. The fun is getting to the point where stuff is automatic, and then promptly starting over.

I would say in factorio, you have to be creative to overcome certain kinds of challenges and therefore is part of the gameplay. Creativity in problem solving. It's not so much about aesthetics, although there are nice ways and ugly ways to solve a problem, which is very subjective. For me, something is nice, if it's easy to understand.

I love the thing you said about wow. This instantly gave me the idea of having a pet or some rare drop from the aliens that help progress later on. Exactly what wow does with the really rare %. Its kinda the same formula over and over again except with a twist every now and then.
Keep up the amazing work!!

With level scaling, monsters conveniently scale to your level in the zone where you are, so you can quest at any place without having to avoid too high or low levels areas relative to your level.. But I consider this to be actually plague of any game where it appears.

thank you. i couldn't have said it better. Level scaling is THE worst thing to happen in the entire history of gaming. my #1 example of this are oblivion and skyrim. magnificient, beautiful, immersive games ... with absolutely zero progression. you can go anywhere, kill anything, learn anything, master everything. after very few hours the game feels dull and boring, no real goal ahead to reach, no long-lasting decisions to make. this isn't what "open world" should be like.

i remember quite a few old NES and PC games from my youth, where there were certain areas off limits for my new character. and it was good this way. leveling up until you are finally able able to survive in the area you wanted to go right from the start felt like a real accomplishment.