Demonizing RNG

[Rudometkin]

A concern has been arising lately in the suggestion forums where members are negatively referring to RNG a lot, seemingly demonizing it. This is fair, but it occurred to me that negative RNG is already in the game, and the game is still beloved by these same members. So this post is an effort to simply balance out what is being said about negative RNG. It is positive reinforcement that negative RNG can overall be for the 'greater good'. So when someone suggests some negative RNG should happen, they don't have to feel like they're necessarily making a poor suggestion when other members shut down their ideas on the basis that 'RNG = BAD'.

RNG is random number generation. Indicating chanced based mechanics.

If a game has high RNG, it will produce volatile (inconsistent, wildly different) game sessions. By negative RNG, I mean the chances for 'bad' things to happen in the game. More RNG can generally mean less control the player has.

If a game has extremely high negative RNG, it could be unfair for the player, rarely giving the player chances to complete the game, if ever.

As an example, I and other(s) have suggested plants should have a chance of contracting a disease, that must then be cured by the player. The plants having a chance to contract a disease is negative RNG.

-----

Here are just a few examples of currently implemented negative RNG in Vintage Story:

• Hostile Animal spawns (wolves, bears, etc)
• Rift and Drifter spawns
• Getting struck by lightning

-----

Without these negative RNG variables in Vintage Story, it would not be anywhere near the game it is today. More negative RNG can absolutely be a great addition to Vintage Story. Don't let anyone tell you that Vintage Story is maxed out on negative RNG. There can be more, and it can make the game even greater than it already is.

[Teh Pizza Lady]

Good RNG:

• Animal spawns and pathing
• Rift and Drifter spawns
• Weather patterns
• Scale patterns on iron blooms
• Ore and terrain distribution (though some would classify it as bad RNG because the terrain can be... well.. they're working on it, okay?)

Bad RNG:

• Anything you can't reasonably be expected to defend against such as getting struck by lightning or a massive cave-in because you touched the wrong block. That's just bad luck.
• Requirements for progress in any game mechanic needed for survival. Imagine needing to plant 3 flax plants just to get one usable fiber just because RNG said "no".

I know there's only two examples in the last one, but I find it hard to think of things that aren't fun. Getting struck by lightning isn't fun. I didn't even know it was possible, but without any way to defend against lightning strikes, getting hit wouldn't be fun for me, personally. As for the last one, players should be able to expect that if they plant 3 crops they should get 3 crops-worth of harvest. Even if that harvest is a range between 1 and idk... 2... it still shouldn't feel like a chore to play a game. I've seen it stated before that "we play games to escape reality. When reality creeps into the game, we lose our immersion and the game is ruined."

Balance isn't necessarily keeping things predictable by eliminating RNG, but rather giving the players the tools to handle the unexpected when the RNG comes up negative. It's up to the player to figure out how to use the tools effectively. It's when that RNG becomes a chore, that we "demonize" it as bad RNG, to quote someone.

[Omega Haxors]

I always felt the RNG in this game was very fair, since it always gives you a chance to overcome it. The only two times I have ever felt the game's RNG genuinely f--- me over is when it spawned a T4 drifter on top of me during a temporal storm instantly killing me and that time where a drifter spawned from a rift before the rift even had a chance to spawn in fully.

With everything else, there's always stuff you can do to skew the odds in your favor, sometimes outright trivializing it if you know what you're doing. For example, finding gold and silver in quartz deposits is my favorite way to get started in a new world by making black bronze and selling it for gears. In any other game that would just be a blind roll of the dice, but knowing that it spawns in quartz veins (this is realistic, btw. The piezoelectric properties of quartz are responsible) means you can fasttrack what would otherwise be an arduous grind. Even stuff like ore spawns which are pure RNG in other block games, have a rhyme and rhythm here, allowing you to find them entirely through intuition with prospecting filling the gaps. Every time I groan to myself "this sucks" it's because i'm not thinking hard enough, and once I do, then comes in that AHA moment which lets me move on.

One thing I like is how often the game rewards you for noticing little details, though I feel sometimes it respects the player far too much and allows a less, um, acute player to be left with a vastly inferior game experience from not knowing a tiny detail that is never once clearly communicated to them by the game.

Edited July 2, 2025 by Omega Haxors

[7embre]

6 hours ago, traugdor said:

Anything you can't reasonably be expected to defend against such as getting struck by lightning or a massive cave-in because you touched the wrong block. That's just bad luck.

Can't agree on your examples, as the game tells you instability level of every rock in the cave. With lightnings, you see where it will strike before it strikes - this spot glows slightly for a short time, just enough for you to get away from it. These two RNG examples are avoidable with enough points in perception. Dirt slides, however... Well, I'll quote Elvas on this one - "this fluffing dirt block was sitting there for thouthands of years, completely stable, with animals and probably people, walking on it for, thouthands of years. But when I step on it, it fluffing slides". Dirt slides trigger is based on RNG, and they can create fun situations (example), it's just that they're annoying most of the times, occuring a few times per every hill you traverse.

Good RNG, in general, brings something new to the game and creates interesting situations. Bad RNG arises from poor implementation and poor understanding of how player will engage with process in question.

Random terrain generation for a sandbox game is good, even if some may argue about how it's done and the lack of things they can do in an empty world.

Random animal spawns are good - after all, you can't know for sure how many wolfs are in this forest and where they are. You may or may not encounter them, entering the forest. And that's a good thing. Even though the game's trying to go into the direction of "you can eliminate all of the wildlife in your area, and that would be on you" (or, at least, tried to go. Have no idea how things are now on a dev side).

Getting sick in game randomly is as bad as it's frustrating, as game forces you into udesirable gameplay. And, well, plain boring one. Some may place temporal storms in this category as well (even though they aren't random), but that's something we have to live with. I'm personally fine with them, as they ground things up a bit.

Randomly killing crops for no particular reason is bad. If you're to implement such thing, you should clearly define it's cause, as that's a negative effect. Making things arbitrary will lead to frustration on player's end. Please notice: I'm not trowing this suggestion out of the window. I'm pointing at the fact that you have to think carefully about any side-effect of said decision.

In regards to RNG in loot, can be both good and bad. "You can't say if this particular drifter has temporal or rusty gear, and they shouldn't all have them" (good). "You can't say if this drifter/shiver/bowtorn will drop Jonas part or not, thus you have to grind them to fight the odds" (questionable). "You can't say how much meat you'll get from this boar, but you can guess the range from it's weight at least" (good). "You can't guarantee if you'll get any meat from fish" (bad).

Making games is both talent and a job. Not everyone can understand how to make a good experience, and it's fine. That's why we have those who are making games. My vision can have some flaws and biases as well, I don't deny that, as I'm not a professional. But I at least have solid arguments as to how I view things.