Vintage Story Is a Challenge-Centered Game.

[Rudometkin]

I'm reformatting this from one of my other posts, to make it a post of its own in the discussion forum.

Lately, I have been getting heat from suggesting several challenge-based content ideas for Vintage Story.

Some members of the community are raising a common fallacy of generalization as an objection: "Majority of people don't want more challenge, so your challenging suggestions are merely suitable for mods!". Questioning and managing difficulty is one thing. Having the general outspoken community rejecting ideas in favor of ease is another.

This is a bizarre objection, considering Vintage Story does not put its general focus on the concept of 'ease', but literally the opposite. So then why are people who are bragged about as "having experience in the game" doing it?

It therefore turns out my challenge-based suggestions fit appropriately in that regard, regardless of the general community opinion.

We are always subject to see a majority of people prefer 'easier'. It's mainstream, it's the path of least resistance. But Vintage Story players are not necessarily in that group, and Vintage Story is not intended to cater to that mainstream path of least resistance.

Seconds before I bought (4 copies of) this game, I saw what Tyron wanted me to see.

Quote

"Vintage Story is an uncompromising wilderness survival sandbox game inspired by eldritch horror themes. Find yourself in a ruined world reclaimed by nature and permeated by unnerving temporal disturbances. Relive the advent of human civilization, or take your own path."

Clearly several people in this community still haven't prepared themselves like Tyron told them to.

The opening quote:

Quote

 

If you only do what is easy,

your life will be hard.

Prepare yourself

For uncompromising

Wilderness survival

 

This implies if you "do the hard things", your life will get easier in Vintage Story, and that "doing the hard things" is what the new player is intended to start with. The description of Vintage Story that Tyron wants everyone to see is clear. It screams, "This is going to be a challenge, that you must overcome, if you want it to get a remote sense of ease".

----------

The Learning Curve Objection:

There is also a common complaint about the learning curve for new players: "Adding challenge will just make it harder for new players, and the learning curve is already steep as it is".

As Tyron has established, new players are intended to start with challenge, so adding more challenge is at least "fitting the theme" at worst.

Also, adding complexity adds to the learning curve. Adding challenge for a new player does not necessarily add to the learning curve. The player could learn everything they need to about know about fighting drifters. Then, someone can come by and suggest Vintage Story makes drifters have twice the health to make battling them more challenging. In this case, adding challenge for the new player did not make the learning curve more steep. Since, learning whether a drifter has 10 hit-points or 20 hit-points has the same level of complexity.

Having to overcome harder challenges is not the same as having to learn more.

----------

Of course people don't like when I bring up the game description to support my position, so they naturally resort to undermining the official game description.

But that doesn't work. My position happens to be the winning position here. This is a challenge-centered game. Consider swallowing that pill already.

With this anchored into the forums, I want to encourage everyone to work together in a healthy and intellectual manner. We are one family with a shared interest.

Edited July 3, 2025 by Rudometkin
Refinement

[Zane Mordien]

Everyone is allowed their opinion and there is a difference between a fun game that requires some grind and a game that is nothing but grind.  A lot of people already consider this game a grind. I think the plan is to add new features that require more of a grind (steam power for example) vs making everything a grind if that makes sense? I say this a lot, but VS does not need to be Wurm. If you love the grind then I suggest you try it. It's an old old game but man is it a grind.

[Teh Pizza Lady]

11 minutes ago, Rudometkin said:

I want to encourage everyone to work together in a healthy and intellectual manner.

Then drop the arrogant attitude when faced with rebuttal from those that disagree with you.

[Rudometkin]

1 minute ago, Zane Mordien said:

Everyone is allowed their opinion and there is a difference between a fun game that requires some grind and a game that is nothing but grind.

Precisely, and I agree with you.

Fortunately, I for one haven't noticed anyone here try to make Vintage Story 'nothing but a grind'.

However, since I am becoming known for defending the challenge of Vintage Story, it is natural for others to fallaciously label me as "trying to make the game nothing but grind", which is not my position at all.

[Moltrey]

Ghost Pirate stew, eh? YOU EAT IT!!

Ah, poor Shag and Scoob. I think old Shag would be saying "Zoinks!" a lot while playing Vintage Story. I find the adversaries annoying as they tend to always show up when you are furiously trying to complete a task. DOH! 

[Rudometkin]

5 hours ago, Moltrey said:

Ghost Pirate stew, eh? YOU EAT IT!!

Ah, poor Shag and Scoob. I think old Shag would be saying "Zoinks!" a lot while playing Vintage Story. I find the adversaries annoying as they tend to always show up when you are furiously trying to complete a task. DOH! 

I think this was the random comedic relief we needed.

EDIT:

I just remembered my profile picture is of Redbeard from the original Scooby Doo series (because I crack up every time I look at it, the expression is hilarious), and Moltrey was making a reference of it. LOL!

Edited July 2, 2025 by Rudometkin

[Rudometkin]

15 minutes ago, Rudometkin said:

Arrogant: having or revealing an exaggerated sense of one's own importance or abilities.

Upon further reflection, I reconsidered whether I have been showing some arrogance.

I speak in an extremely authoritative manner with my suggestions for Vintage Story.

I say things like, "Let's add it to the game." "This should be added." "This is justified."

I just realized that is likely a culprit to the arrogance critique I have been getting.

The idea is, if I am a 0 in terms of being the owner of the game, then I should not being acting like I am a 100 in terms of being the owner of the game.

Perhaps this is textbook arrogance.

However, I propose it is justified that we all take ownership of Vintage Story. Because in a sense, we are the lifeblood of the game. Without us, Vintage Story would not be what it is.

We already do take ownership of Vintage Story. I'm not the only one here. Many of us have been seen saying "This should be added" and "this shouldn't be added", as if we are the owners of the game. And I propose it should be this way. Stand up and take it as your own. Treat it like it's yours. That's what gives the game more life and a stronger community.

So have I been arrogant? Maybe, technically, perhaps. But same goes with you, and many others of us. Perhaps in a good way

Just a quick thought.

[Maelstrom]

I find that the voices arguing for an easier game tend to be the newer players with less than 2 years since creating their account.  It's hard for me to gauge how hard the game is now, since I've got 6 updates under my belt and all that experience doesn't go *poof* just because I wish it so.  Given that, I think the game is easier now (thanks to the survival guides and tutorial) than it was prior to about 1.18. 

Call me an old fart, but I liked the difficulty involved in being able to survive that first night, then the first summer, then the first winter.  I think I started, abandonded and restarted a half dozen worldsstarting with 1.14 before I started my serious long term world to discover all the lore I could find in 1.16.  So given the hard start from those days?  I don't have a lot of sympathy for people complaining about the difficulty of the game.  It's intended to be difficult. 

Spoiler

tl;dr

Get good or get gone.  

 

[Thorfinn]

Or get mods. The extremes on both sides of this should probably  be using mods. If you can keep the middle 2/3 happy, that's about as good as you can do.

[Maelstrom]

Additionally, the settings allow for a huge variation for adjusting the difficulty.  

Putting on my devil's advocate hat - Aren't we always encouraging new farts, err, newbies to play default for a while?  To which, the goal for that 2/3 should be the focus of the default settings.

[Enjen]

35 minutes ago, Maelstrom said:

It's intended to be difficult. 

Agreed! This is the reason that the argument "It'll make the game harder" should be shied away from. The game is difficult for any new player no matter when in time they start playing. Like you mentioned: 

37 minutes ago, Maelstrom said:

Given that, I think the game is easier now (thanks to the survival guides and tutorial) than it was prior to about 1.18. 

New players joining today (1.20) may feel that it's just as difficult as you did when you first started, even though the game might actually be easier now.
 

18 minutes ago, Thorfinn said:

Or get mods. The extremes on both sides of this should probably  be using mods.

This sort of answer is just dismissive though. This neglects to entertain the idea of potential improvements to the game in light of keeping it the same or "not making it harder". Of course anyone can just make a mod about their idea. There is no reason to suggest that. Which ideas would you consider worthy suggestions? Suggestions that you wouldn't reply "Get mods" or "Just make a mod", "suggest it as a mod"?

10 minutes ago, Maelstrom said:

Additionally, the settings allow for a huge variation for adjusting the difficulty.  

Putting on my devil's advocate hat - Aren't we always encouraging new farts, err, newbies to play default for a while?  To which, the goal for that 2/3 should be the focus of the default settings.

Well put!~ When do you think enough is enough when it comes to difficulty in the base game? Since it is adjustable. 

[Thorfinn]

18 minutes ago, Enjen said:

This sort of answer is just dismissive though. This neglects to entertain the idea of potential improvements to the game in light of keeping it the same or "not making it harder". Of course anyone can just make a mod about their idea. There is no reason to suggest that.

Like you just finished saying, it's already plenty hard for many new players. Unlike @Maelstrom, I usually suggest that people select easier settings or mods if they are getting close to rage quitting. I have no idea how many people harping about wolves that I've told to turn up their HP and turn down creature strength and work your way up. Same as if you went to the gym or decided to run a marathon. You have to work your way up or you are going to the hospital. Or morgue.

Standard survival is just that -- standard. Tuned for the middle-of-the-road player. Not the n00b, not the733t. This is a good setting for a bunch of friends getting together to chill.

Wilderness Survival is more for experienced players, and you can significantly increase the difficulty from there from within the game. If that's not enough, there's mods.

Sorry you think it's dismissive, but it's the truth.

Edited July 3, 2025 by Thorfinn

[Thorfinn]

33 minutes ago, Maelstrom said:

Aren't we always encouraging new farts, err, newbies to play default for a while?  To which, the goal for that 2/3 should be the focus of the default settings.

Oh, default, yes. I misunderstood. I thought you were talking defaults. As in 15 HP, 125% creature strength, whatever standard defaults are. But some of it can't be done like that. If your big objection is the bowtorn, and the only thing that will keep you from rage-quits is getting rid of them, then you have to seek out one of the mods that removes them. Maybe later once you have the core game figured out, you can decide to add in a nerfed version.

[Rudometkin]

Unfortunately, one of my large messages appears to have been silently deleted from this thread somehow. I have been silenced, somehow.

It appears to me that I am being shadow banned (secretly silenced) by staff, as they have already warned me on the false pretenses that I am "content trolling". It is not certain that it was staff who deleted my message. It might just not be loading for me, or maybe somehow I deleted it myself (I am very careful to not delete messages).

I have screenshots of the entire message. For anyone who wants it, reach out to me via DM. It was about me thoroughly, kindly, and coherently providing my justification on why I don't believe I have an arrogant attitude, as traugdor implied earlier in this thread.

Funnily enough, the post right after it still happens to be up, where I started off by showing willingness to consider that "maybe I have been showing arrogance".

It seems as though a narrative is being artificially created about me from behind the curtains of the forum staff. That wouldn't be fair.

And if my post got deleted for "engaging with someone's behavior" (which is what I was given a warning for, deemed guilty of doing by Rorax), then why didn't @traugdor get silenced by having their message get deleted for engaging with my apparent behavior? (She? He?) Is clearly up there engaging with my apparent "behavior". And I don't want them to get silenced. I think they have a right to speak that opinion of theirs, and I will fight for them to not be silenced for something like that. I didn't flag them. Does staff only moderate flagged posts? I understand staff is very busy, but what's going on here?

Many of you may not like me, but letting me get treated rather unfairly like this may backfire on you one day, because one day it could be "you" who gets wrongfully accused of "content trolling" by staff.

And if you see me as getting what I deserve, then so be it, doesn't hurt my feelings. But this here is something the community should be very careful about. Even this post may be deleted for "controversy and drama". But it's really just me adequately and reasonably representing my experience as a fair member of this community.

Edited July 3, 2025 by Rudometkin
Refinement.

[Enjen]

21 minutes ago, Thorfinn said:

Like you just finished saying, it's already plenty hard for many new players. Unlike @Maelstrom, I usually suggest that people select easier settings or mods if they are getting close to rage quitting. I have no idea how many people harping about wolves that I've told to turn up their HP and turn down creature strength and work your way up. Same as if you went to the gym or decided to run a marathon. You have to work your way up or you are going to the hospital. Or morgue.

Standard survival is just that -- standard. Tuned for the middle-of-the-road player. Not the n00b, not the733t. This is a good setting for a bunch of friends getting together to chill.

Wilderness Survival is more for experienced players, and you can significantly increase the difficulty from there from within the game. If that's not enough, there's mods.

Sorry you think it's dismissive, but it's the truth.

Yes, the settings are adjustable as you mentioned with your examples of Standard and Wilderness. But Standard is not "for a bunch of friends getting together to chill." lol Standard is the Base Standard for the game. If you need it easier adjust it down. For example, the Standard difficulty of VS is much higher than the Standard of The Other Block Game.


^ This is a screenshot grabbed directly from the wiki of what the Standard preset is. I won't touch on Wilderness because you explained it well.

All this is to say that an idea shouldn't be turned away because it'll make the game more difficult.  and allow me to ask my questions again @Thorfinn: Which ideas would you consider worthy suggestions? Suggestions that you wouldn't reply "Get mods" or "Just make a mod", "suggest it as a mod"?

[Zane Mordien]

1 minute ago, Enjen said:

All this is to say that an idea shouldn't be turned away because it'll make the game more difficult.  and allow me to ask my questions again @Thorfinn: Which ideas would you consider worthy suggestions? Suggestions that you wouldn't reply "Get mods" or "Just make a mod", "suggest it as a mod"?

That is his default opinion. I get frustrated with it as well sometimes, but again this is his opinion. Thorfinn can't turn anything down. He isn't a developer of this game. He just has his opinion. 

 

[Zane Mordien]

8 minutes ago, Rudometkin said:

It was about me thoroughly, kindly, and coherently providing my justification on why I don't believe I have an arrogant attitude, as traugdor implied earlier in this thread.

Look at your deep discussion thread where you tell someone:

1 hour ago, Rudometkin said:

It took me about 30 seconds to see that fatal flaw in your argument. I encourage you to think deeply about it. I have already spent years reflecting and refining my own worldview, being my own harshest critic on the fundamental principles I adhere to.

That comes across as arrogant. There pitiful opinion was trivial and hardly worth your time because you have spent so much time working on yourself. You are superior and they need to spend time working on themselves to approach your levels of insight.  

Is that what you intended? I hope not, but that is how it reads.

[Enjen]

4 minutes ago, Zane Mordien said:

That is his default opinion. I get frustrated with it as well sometimes, but again this is his opinion. Thorfinn can't turn anything down. He isn't a developer of this game. He just has his opinion. 

 

Absolutely! and I agree. I admit I did get a bit frustrated and may be drilling it a little too much. How he chooses to interact with an idea is completely up to him. I cannot force anybody to respond to ideas in a certain way.

I apologize Thorfinn. You're entitled to your opinion. As am I. May we have more discussions in the future.

[Thorfinn]

Give it time, @Enjen. Stick with the game and you will eventually decide default Standard is just the setting you play when you don't want to have to pay attention to what you are doing.

4 minutes ago, Enjen said:

Which ideas would you consider worthy suggestions?

At the moment, I don't know. I'm vastly more interested in getting the basic functionality up to snuff, including the dejank. If the Madleners decide to take the money and retire to a private island in the South Pacific, core development may or may not continue, but basic JSON editing can create much of what people are suggesting. So simple even a caveman could do it.  

I was going to say something like a more easily configurable user setting for spawns, but then I remembered DanaCraluminum already released such a mod.

[Enjen]

2 minutes ago, Thorfinn said:

I was going to say something like a more easily configurable user setting for spawns, but then I remembered DanaCraluminum already released such a mod.

They're the one who developed DanasTweaks right? They've done wonders with that mod lol

3 minutes ago, Thorfinn said:

At the moment, I don't know. I'm vastly more interested in getting the basic functionality up to snuff, including the dejank.

Agreed! Continued maintenance for the game is always nice to look forward to. A refinement of the vision if you will hahaha. I do admire the game being so open with its code. It's truly inspired me to pick up coding!

[Rudometkin]

3 hours ago, Zane Mordien said:

Look at your deep discussion thread where you tell someone:

That comes across as arrogant. There pitiful opinion was trivial and hardly worth your time because you have spent so much time working on yourself. You are superior and they need to spend time working on themselves to approach your levels of insight.  

Is that what you intended? I hope not, but that is how it reads.

I understand it comes across as arrogant to people. But the very post that seems to have been deleted in this thread was me going in detail about what arrogance is said to be, and justifying how just because someone appears arrogant, does not mean they are arrogant nor incorrect. Arrogance is showing inflated sense of value, to quote it very loosely for time purposes. Perhaps I do have the value I act like I do. That wouldn't be arrogance. That would be me acting appropriately concerning the position I am coming from. In the discussion you are referring to, I revealed the other member's self-refuting argument. I did the work. If you perhaps disagree that I was correct there, then how about you show with logic and reason that I was incorrect? Maybe then, you could prove I was arrogant, and put the controversy to rest - reveal a difference between my attitude about my adequacy and my actual adequacy (and I'm not trying to put you on the spot to do that, I'm just suggesting you could, and since you haven't, it serves to support my case that I am not being arrogant).

I did not say "I am superior" in general, so how is that how it reads? We should logically deduct from each others messages, not 'read' into them. I did not say that because I do not believe I am "superior" in general. Let's be fair.

You also left out the part where I said this right after:

Quote

 

And it's not merely about me trying to be the "right" one in a forum. I was led to this viewpoint by years of experience, consideration, being open to being wrong, open to changing, refining my thoughts, and by being my own harshest critic. It's about fighting for what is true, healthy, accurate and fair. And if that makes me appear like an arrogant narcissist like others have claimed, then that is the cost I am willing to pay.

You seem to have a rather intellectual grasp with vocabulary. I expect you to appreciate this post in the name of coherence, truth and meaning, and maybe we can be friends.

 

Does it still look so much like I'm being arrogant? (Me talking about being open to being wrong, and changing, sounds arrogant?) If so, feel free to prove it by revealing a difference between my attitude about my adequacy and my actual adequacy on the subject!)

And what I determine is worth my time is up to me, isn't it? I am standing for what I believe is healthy, true and fair. I understand I'm being attacked from many angles, but frankly in general none of my fellow friendly critics in the community have refuted me yet regarding what I say about my character, though many may think they have, my justification via reasoning is on the boards (well, except for the one(s) that got silently deleted).

The only things I'm fearing here is that the community is not being fair, and that I unfortunately may get banned soon for being genuine and reinforcing my demonstrable coherent reasonable and relevant point of view regarding vintage story and this community.

Edited July 4, 2025 by Rudometkin
Fixed typos

[majestik]

1 hour ago, Thorfinn said:

I usually suggest that people select easier settings or mods if they are getting close to rage quitting. I have no idea how many people harping about wolves that I've told to turn up their HP and turn down creature strength and work your way up. Same as if you went to the gym or decided to run a marathon. You have to work your way up or you are going to the hospital. Or morgue.

That's totally how I approched VS after my first one or two try and die-in-the-first-five-minute games. I really appreciate the different settings that we can play with, as a more of a casual gamer with a slow learning curve. At first I had put all mob as passive so I could run on the forest butt naked without being wolf and bear bait. I don't need to do that anymore but it was cool to be able to do that, that helped me have fun at first. My next step is with the temporal storms and the rift that I disable, but I think i'll soon be ready to play with them.

I am not ashamed that it is my way of playing, and once again I really appreciate the devs to let us so much control on how we want to play the game !

Edited July 3, 2025 by majestik

[Zane Mordien]

3 hours ago, Rudometkin said:

I did not say "I am superior" in general, so how is that how it reads? We should logically deduct from each others messages, not 'read' into them. I did not say that because I do not believe I am "superior" in general. Let's be fair.

There are so many books how on people perceive what you say vs what you mean. 

I'm not going to try and engage you in a debate and prove anything, because it is a waste of your time and mine. I'm just giving you feedback on what I see and how I feel. You can take that feedback in the spirit it was given or you can ignore it.

Best of luck to you.  

[Rudometkin]

27 minutes ago, Zane Mordien said:

There are so many books how on people perceive what you say vs what you mean. 

Yeah, and I read them all. (This is a joke! It's a joke to keep the situation lighthearted! It's just a play on my apparent arrogance! )

I agree, and it's a fascinating subject.

 

27 minutes ago, Zane Mordien said:

I'm not going to try and engage you in a debate and prove anything, because it is a waste of your time and mine. I'm just giving you feedback on what I see and how I feel.

Thank you, and my feedback contained a fair question and point, and that is, "What makes my question read that way? Let's make sure we're not reading into messages here."

 

27 minutes ago, Zane Mordien said:

You can take that feedback in the spirit it was given or you can ignore it.

Best of luck to you.  

Totally appreciate it. Best of luck to you, and I hope to continue seeing you around.

Edited July 4, 2025 by Rudometkin
Added a harmless joke for lightheartedness

[Maelstrom]

21 hours ago, Thorfinn said:

Like you just finished saying, it's already plenty hard for many new players. Unlike @Maelstrom, I usually suggest that people select easier settings or mods if they are getting close to rage quitting.

@Thorfinn Uhhh...  How do they get to that point, if they haven't played default settings?