Who thinks it's odd that the 'Minecraft creative community' haven't flocked to VS.

[Broccoli Clock]

Full disclosure, I've posted this same question on Reddit. I am interested to see the differences in the responses. 

The question comes from seeing this image, which is the greenhouse shown on the 1.22 update notes.

With the following caveat of..

A community is not one homogenous block, I am using a broad brush approach here. There are well known MC creative streamers who have dipped their toes in, so I don't want to say it doesn't happen but overall VS seems to be acknowledged but not embraced.

--

MC creative players have learned to work within the limitations of their environment, some of their stuff is genuinely amazing, I don't think that is in doubt. However, the active word there is "limitations" and it's very clear MC is (in comparison to VS) definitely limited. It's taken them over a decade to get a vertical slab, and even then it's not an actual vertical slab. You see endless solutions to problems create by those limitations.

Yet, take a look at that image I shared (again, not mine, used as an example), there is simply no way that MC can compete. In fact what is shown is extremely simple, just a white brick (say chalk, marble or the new travertine) mixed with glass using a chisel. It's lovely and intricate and I doubt I could replicate it but the point is this sort of level of detail is possible "out of the box" as it were.

When I look over the main MC creative players, and considering just how much more creative expression VS offers, why haven't we seen (even a slow trickle of) MC creative types "switching codes".

[EnbyKaiju]

I saw this post over on the subreddit and have been thinking about it a bit, I think it's a really complex question but could also be very simple. It's highly dependent on who you ask. But in the end I don't think it's a matter of competing, as they are two very different games at their core. But here's a few theories as to why more folks don't move over from MC to VS as their full-time survival/crafting experience:

First off I think there's a level of comfort involved. Most folks who are really into MC have been into it for a very long time. It's their comfort game, they know it inside and out, and it's extremely easy to pick up and put down again.

MC is also a "solved" game. Literally every aspect of the game has been min-maxed to death, to the point where people can go from nothing to end game equipment within an hour. Every item is farmable to some extent, and it ends up a giant lego set that usually goes some way to covering up the infinite item generators. Not that this is bad, it's just not the same experience. VS for the most part makes players earn each stage, and while you can rush forwards and min-max some aspects of VS it's no-where near the level of automation MC is. VS is also constantly shifting over time, you have to focus on more than just eating golden carrots and sleeping when it gets dark.

Then you've got the "content creator" appeal. It's kind of like how other tabletop war games exist, but 40k gets the most clicks, or how other TTRPGs exist, but D&D gets the views. It's an established brand that has so many people hooked to it that it continues to be heavily profitable. Hell, look at something like HermitCraft, VS doesn't have anything like that currently because while there is a growing love of VS I don't think it has the mainstream appeal to make something similar work. This appeal can also be highly predatory, which is another reason why it sticks around.

In terms of pure creative endevour though I think it's a matter of scale, especially if you take the other points above into account. Yes VS has things that vanilla MC will never have. It has chiselling, it has support beams, heck, it has vertical slabs. What it doesn't have is the same paint pallette that MC has, or the ease of making GIANT builds with relative ease (if you have the time). There are multiple blocks of every colour imaginable in MC, because realism to any degree isn't a factor. MC is almost entirely a creative game, with some light survival elements included (at least since it came out of beta), VS is a survival game with huge creative potential but you have to earn the blocks you want to use, often through multiple-stage processes that all take time (outside of creative mode).

So link all these things together. VS is a game that's not a long enough established game to be a mainstream "comfort game", it's not solved, it's not entirely min-maxed, content creators know they can get more support on the MC side of things, and players have to earn the resources they use outside of creative mode. In the end I can see why all-in MC players stick with what they have, and if they still love it then I'm happy for them even if it's not a game that I enjoy any more.

That being said...I have seen MC players who come over and try VS and utterly fall in love with it. And you can see the passion they have for VS when they play it, and they often talk about wanting to play more. But they know what their audience wants. And there aren't nearly as many successful VS creators as their are MC ones, not with an entire generation growing up playing nothing else than MC.

Anyway, it's complicated. I don't think there should be competition between the games, just as much as I don't think there should be competition between VS & Hytale. They are all different kinds of game. I could probably talk about my theories, assumptions, and conclusions after a few years of both playing VS and consuming media about it. Some of what I said above might be way off, but that's my view as someone who has been a) a games journalist, b) a game developer, c) a survival/crafting game player since the genre emerged, and d) chronically online. There's probably also a bunch of stuff I missed, but this message has already gone on way too long.

In the end, play what makes you happy, and I hope more folks who want to experiment with the fine detail kind of creativity that VS can provide find it and fall in love.

[Broccoli Clock]

50 minutes ago, EnbyKaiju said:

..but in the end I don't think it's a matter of competing, as they are two very different games at their core. 

Thanks that's a very detailed answer, and I think you are spot on that it's several reasons all rolled into one. I also don't think this is a matter of competing. They are different games, but when in creative mode it's a much closer analogue. I think that closeness when you remove survival, add in that people just enjoy creating stuff irrelevant of the platform used, you would see more people "cross over". I'm not suggesting they abandon what is likely to be making most of their money, but (and this is just me) at least testing out an alternative.

In regard to the final statement; Yes, of course, you pay your money and you take your choice. I'm not forcing people onto VS, but like you I do want to see people get love from the game. It seems like the door is open but few want to cross the threshold. 

 

 

[LadyWYT]

13 hours ago, Broccoli Clock said:

Yet, take a look at that image I shared (again, not mine, used as an example), there is simply no way that MC can compete. In fact what is shown is extremely simple, just a white brick (say chalk, marble or the new travertine) mixed with glass using a chisel. It's lovely and intricate and I doubt I could replicate it but the point is this sort of level of detail is possible "out of the box" as it were.

Actually, I disagree. As long as one plays on Java, Minecraft can compete, to a degree, thanks to mods. I've seen at least one or two different chisel mods appear, though I don't know if they're still maintained, and there are many mods that add various decorative clutter.

But if we're talking strictly vanilla? Yeah, Minecraft isn't competing with that, but then again it doesn't have to. Echoing @EnbyKaiju's sentiments, Minecraft is a different game than Vintage Story, with a different voxel artstyle and different goals. Vintage Story is heavily grounded in realistic natural process, with some gritty eldritch horror sprinkled in for seasoning. Minecraft, in contrast, doesn't really take realism into account(save for really odd cases) and is a lot more whimsical rather than dark and gritty. Vintage Story will scare the absolute bejeebers out of players or otherwise creep them out; Minecraft very much will not. Vintage Story demands a higher level of engagement from players if they want to succeed, while Minecraft is much easier and offers a more relaxed experience. As a result, the playerbases for each game are very different, with Minecraft appealing to a younger audience because it's fun, colorful, and simpler to manage, while Vintage Story appeals to an older audience who is more likely to appreciate the tougher challenges and grittier storytelling.

Even strictly among the adult audience though, Minecraft is probably still likely to win more players because it's built to have mass appeal. That's not saying that Vintage Story couldn't have mass appeal either, but it's tailored to a more specific audience and some of its core design features, like gritty lore, tough challenges, and realistic processes, just aren't likely to appeal to players who want a game they can pick up and have fun breezing through on a weekend.

9 hours ago, EnbyKaiju said:

Hell, look at something like HermitCraft, VS doesn't have anything like that currently because while there is a growing love of VS I don't think it has the mainstream appeal to make something similar work. This appeal can also be highly predatory, which is another reason why it sticks around.

I dunno, the Rusty Gears SMP series on YouTube seems somewhat similar to what Hermitcraft does, though a lot more relaxed. That being said, I've not watched much of it either.

As for mass appeal being a high risk for predatory behavior...oh absolutely. Not everything with mass appeal necessarily is, mind you--Hermitcraft stands out as something fairly wholesome--but things with wide appeal/popular ideas are often exploited by those chasing clicks and easy money. To be fair though, most of those who are trying to exploit stuff like that tend not to understand what made it successful to begin with.

10 hours ago, EnbyKaiju said:

And there aren't nearly as many successful VS creators as their are MC ones, not with an entire generation growing up playing nothing else than MC.

I'm not saying adults don't watch YouTube, but I mean...I tended to watch more "let's plays" and stuff when I was in college, whereas now I don't really watch that kind of thing anymore. Could just be me, but most of the time I have other stuff to do or would rather be enjoying the game myself. I feel like children/teens/college-age adults are probably more likely to watch creators on YouTube since they grew up with that stuff and have a lot more time to watch.

It may also be because Vintage Story has some definite "slow moments" whereas Minecraft is pretty adept at shuttling the player from one shiny thing to the next. Most people probably aren't going to be interested in someone flipping through the handbook, or hiding in a hole, or dying to monsters/wildlife for the umpteenth time in a row. That's not to say good VS content can't be made, just that I think VS content in general will have a slower pace and take much more editing to produce a polished product. 

 

[EnbyKaiju]

9 minutes ago, LadyWYT said:

It may also be because Vintage Story has some definite "slow moments" whereas Minecraft is pretty adept at shuttling the player from one shiny thing to the next. Most people probably aren't going to be interested in someone flipping through the handbook, or hiding in a hole, or dying to monsters/wildlife for the umpteenth time in a row. That's not to say good VS content can't be made, just that I think VS content in general will have a slower pace and take much more editing to produce a polished product. 

I can't remember which VS creator I watched who said it, but something that is special about Vintage Story is that everything takes time. Growing crops takes time, making anything with metal takes time, making charcoal takes time, making leather takes time...etc. Minecraft isn't about things taking time, almost anything can be done either instantly or via AFK farm. So, like you said, it shuffles people from one shiny thing to the next instead of setting up a bunch of longer term processes and then taking off time waiting for them to finish.

As a result you definitely end up with something that's a lot slower pace, takes more time to edit, and isn't as flashy.

That being said, I think VS has a greater strength as a roleplaying game, at least unmodded. Because the more folks you have playing the more you need to split the load up among people to complete tasks for the group. One person can't have/do everything unlike a MC player with a automatic farm and...shudders...a villager trading hall full of caged people.

There are some incredible folks making videos, like the Rusty Gears stuff, or like the Ignus group (who did Ren, and are now doing Torched), and a lot of what makes those efforts special is very different from what draws folks to MC.

Just more of my thoughts.

[ifoz]

I think the comment about megabuilds is an important point - many popular Minecraft builders probably won't want to do much with VS due to the fact megabuilds aren't as viable. Megabuilds sell very well in thumbnails, whereas you can't really show off the average VS base in a single still image. VS generally encourages you to have multiple rooms/areas, and then use chiselling, wrench offsetting, support beams etc to really make those areas packed full of detail and function.
Sure you might be able to make a thumbnail of the base exterior, but a likely equal amount of work will have been put into the different parts of the interior.

As much as I love building in VS (I think this game has a genuinely amazing building system with so much creative potential), the block palette is also a little lacking. I get that the game is going for more grounded, realistic textures, and I like that a lot. But the real life middle ages were full of colour! I'd love if we were able to paint/dye plaster to create a brighter blockset than wattle and daub, as well as stain wood to finally get planks with a nice deep brown tone. (RedRam did mention linseed oil being used to treat lumber in the future, so fingers crossed!) Having blocks of dyed cloth and leather would also be very nice, even if not the most immersive. That way you could chisel custom furniture and carpets using textiles rather than rock, daub or sand like people currently do. Saraty did mention custom carpets when weaving is eventually introduced which is very exciting, but I still think chiselling could benefit from cloth blocks.

[LadyWYT]

34 minutes ago, EnbyKaiju said:

I can't remember which VS creator I watched who said it, but something that is special about Vintage Story is that everything takes time. Growing crops takes time, making anything with metal takes time, making charcoal takes time, making leather takes time...etc. Minecraft isn't about things taking time, almost anything can be done either instantly or via AFK farm. So, like you said, it shuffles people from one shiny thing to the next instead of setting up a bunch of longer term processes and then taking off time waiting for them to finish.

There's also the factor of...the Vintage Story world is legitimately dangerous, whereas Minecraft...really isn't. Not even the Deep Dark is that dangerous, since the player has three strikes before they summon a warden, and in the event a warden does appear...the player can just fly away via elytra or enderpearl. And things that qualify as somewhat dangerous, like the warden and wither, are things that the player has to deliberately go looking for; there's pretty much nothing to jeopardize the player on a regular basis outside of maybe a creeper accident...and that's a pretty big maybe. In contrast, Vintage Story is pretty good at killing players, since right from the start food is going to be a big concern, and danger will absolutely come knocking on the player's door sooner or later, whether they want it to or not. That danger might be in the form of a temporal storm, or nocturnal rift activity, or even a bear wandering out of the nearby forest.

 

13 minutes ago, ifoz said:

I still think chiselling could benefit from cloth blocks.

I agree, though I don't think cloth blocks are necessary. I'd rather see colored plaster, since that makes much more sense as a building material and gives more use to dyes aside from being a niche Tailor resource. And if I'm recalling my art history correctly, plaster was a key component in many classic mural masterpieces; the technique in question is "fresco", where pigments are mixed with plaster before getting painted onto the surface. A difficult medium to work with, but tends to be a little sturdier than normal paint.

Edited April 5 by LadyWYT
Corrected a word

[Lollard]

Designing and chiseling that greenhouse was the easy part, the hard part was getting it to register as a valid greenhouse.

[Vanassa]

Speaking strictly from a PR perspective, Minecraft hit the jackpot with Youtube. It became viral, content creators monetised it's gameplay and tutorials, drawing in more content creators looking to strike that financial itch while playing an easily accessible game. Along with TikTok, the audience hit the generation of addictiveness.

Vintage Story, has a much lower PR profile, relying on word of mouth and while there are content creators on Youtube and other media platforms, they pale in comparison to the Minecraft juggernaut it has become. VS is seen as niche, aimed at a specific audience.

[Farmore]

Learning curve. VS has a very steep learning curve and a much slower progression system than MC. I've been playing MC for years and have a long-term forever world, but I can easily build everything I built in my 90hour VS run in just a day or two in MC. Everything takes significantly longer than MC and for survival let's players and streamers that just isn't viable. Would you rather spend 2 hours strip mining at Y -59 at any location and get several stacks of ore in MC, or spent 2 hours prospecting in VS only to find nothing and end up with a broken pick?

As other have said, VS is also not as well known as MC. Arguably the people who play this game are playing it specifically for the survival challenge and more realistic gameplay (compared to MC). The MC community is bigger and more well-established and every feature has been optimized, not to mention nostalgia factor and cultural relevance. In terms of community creation, VS builds tend to be realistic or adjacent to that. The color palette of the game lends itself to that but MC's is a lot more colorful and blocks are overall easier to get. For some people, the ease of getting blocks for specific builds in survival might be a creative factor. Also, MC has redstone and somehow people are making calculators in vanilla.

To be honest, the communities and gameplay are honestly very different. MC is fast, VS is slow, but I think VS would hit a lot of things long term MC players (like myself) are looking for which is why I switched to VS. MC and VS are similar as block based survival games with 3x3 crafting grids focused on building, but that's about where the similarities end. And if someone wants more features like chiseling in their MC world they will just mod it as @LadyWYT said. To be honest, mods are just as integral to the MC community as VS is, but they have a lot more mods than VS does on the basis of having a larger community. A lot of popular MC gamers and SMPs are running some form of mods, even if its just vanilla-style optimization mods or QOL so it's not like people are a stranger to altering their own gameplay progression.

IMO, the main thing preventing more people from playing VS is still the initial learning curve (which even for MC players is still quite difficult) and the speed of progression. I highly doubt creative builders and redstoners will switch en masse to VS but I can absolutely see more survival gameplay and hardcore players falling in love with the game. But VS is a very specific playerbase.

Edited April 6 by Farmore

[Teh Pizza Lady]

Minecraft's fanbase is mostly children. Vintage Story is a game for adults, or at least those with more maturity than your average child subscriber on YouTube.

[KahvozeinsFang]

They probably know people just don't want to watch vintage story videos. Even the most popular VS creators are regularly under 10k views per video. And I'm talking about people who built their channels on VS. 

 

Yeah, you have the occasional videos that reach much, much higher numbers. But those are usually YouTubers with established audiences from other games. Not people who made their channels from VS. 

 

Maybe it's because much like actually playing the game, any let's play series takes forever to actually get anything done. The game has been shot in the foot when it comes to today's audiences. There is no attention span anymore. They want instant gratification.

 

I bought a copy of this game for my niece like a year ago. She loved it for all of about two days. After things weren't progressing fast enough she didn't want to play anymore. She just went back to playing 7 days to die and Minecraft. Haven't been able to get her to play since. 

 

I really feel VS's days are numbered. Where as Minecraft will endure for decades into the future because those players now will introduce Minecraft to their kids when they grow up.

Edited April 6 by KahvozeinsFang

[Farmore]

4 hours ago, Farmore said:

Learning curve. VS has a very steep learning curve and a much slower progression system than MC. I've been playing MC for years and have a long-term forever world, but I can easily build everything I built in my 90hour VS run in just a day or two in MC. Everything takes significantly longer than MC and for survival let's players and streamers that just isn't viable. Would you rather spend 2 hours strip mining at Y -59 at any location and get several stacks of ore in MC, or spent 2 hours prospecting in VS only to find nothing and end up with a broken pick?

As other have said, VS is also not as well known as MC. Arguably the people who play this game are playing it specifically for the survival challenge and more realistic gameplay (compared to MC). The MC community is bigger and more well-established and every feature has been optimized, not to mention nostalgia factor and cultural relevance. In terms of community creation, VS builds tend to be realistic or adjacent to that. The color palette of the game lends itself to that but MC's is a lot more colorful and blocks are overall easier to get. For some people, the ease of getting blocks for specific builds in survival might be a creative factor. Also, MC has redstone and somehow people are making calculators in vanilla.

To be honest, the communities and gameplay are honestly very different. MC is fast, VS is slow, but I think VS would hit a lot of things long term MC players (like myself) are looking for which is why I switched to VS. MC and VS are similar as block based survival games with 3x3 crafting grids focused on building, but that's about where the similarities end. And if someone wants more features like chiseling in their MC world they will just mod it as @LadyWYT said. To be honest, mods are just as integral to the MC community as VS is, but they have a lot more mods than VS does on the basis of having a larger community. A lot of popular MC gamers and SMPs are running some form of mods, even if its just vanilla-style optimization mods or QOL so it's not like people are a stranger to altering their own gameplay progression.

IMO, the main thing preventing more people from playing VS is still the initial learning curve (which even for MC players is still quite difficult) and the speed of progression. I highly doubt creative builders and redstoners will switch en masse to VS but I can absolutely see more survival gameplay and hardcore players falling in love with the game. But VS is a very specific playerbase.

To add onto this:

Since VS is not available on Steam or console, it means that it has a smaller playerbase. MC is available on every major console via bedrock edition and java for PC players. The devs say that despite this the game has had a pretty steady influx of revenue and players, which I think is pretty cool! But it's also worth considering that some people don't want to buy games via sites like humble bundle or itch (which last I checked VS is no longer available on itch?). I think it's cool that the devs offer VS on their own site though. 

Either way, the game only being available on the VS site and humble bundle means it's mostly being spread through word of mouth and the occasional popular YouTube video. While most popular MC gamers are playing on java regardless, the availability of MC on more platforms and consoles means more players.

[ifoz]

3 hours ago, KahvozeinsFang said:

I really feel VS's days are numbered. Where as Minecraft will endure for decades into the future because those players now will introduce Minecraft to their kids when they grow up.

Personally, I disagree.
VS has been in development for over 10 years now (they celebrated their 10th anniversary earlier this year), and given the steadily increasing player count, I can't really see it going anywhere any time soon.

Sure the general modern audience is after something more fast-paced, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a more niche audience after something slower. As an example, UnReal World released in 1992, and is still being updated to this day. That's a far more niche and somewhat more hardcore survival game than VS is with an even steeper learning curve, and I think that just goes to show that usually when your game hits a niche audience, they don't just pack up and leave when the next interesting thing comes along like a more general audience might.

Edited April 6 by ifoz

[ArgentLuna]

A lot of people once they find what works for them stay with it no matter what else could also do that or similar. 

[LadyWYT]

3 hours ago, Farmore said:

Since VS is not available on Steam or console, it means that it has a smaller playerbase. MC is available on every major console via bedrock edition and java for PC players.

I don't think "not being on Steam" is why VS is somewhat niche. Minecraft isn't on Steam either and runs via its own launcher for PC instead, and it's done just fine.

 

2 hours ago, ifoz said:

Sure the general modern audience is after something more fast-paced, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a more niche audience after something slower.

Pretty much this as well, though trends can always change. It's true that "fast and easy" tends to appeal to a wide audience, however, when absolutely everything under the sun seems to be pushing for "fast and easy" then something that invites players to slow down and be more deliberate in their actions and planning will stand out.

 

2 hours ago, ifoz said:

usually when your game hits a niche audience, they don't just pack up and leave when the next interesting thing comes along like a more general audience might.

The value of building a solid community/fanbase really can't be understated. Casting a net wide might catch a lot of fish, however, when the thing stops being popular then all those fish are going to move on to whatever the next big thing is. In contrast, a more niche thing with a highly devoted fanbase might not rake as much cash up front, but will provide much more stable income over the course of time since it's catering to a specific audience.

[Farmore]

On 4/6/2026 at 8:21 PM, LadyWYT said:

I don't think "not being on Steam" is why VS is somewhat niche. Minecraft isn't on Steam either and runs via its own launcher for PC instead, and it's done just fine.

On it's own, no! But like I said before:

On 4/6/2026 at 4:42 PM, Farmore said:

VS is not available on Steam or console

Keyword is or.
Not being on Steam isn't really enough of a case for a game to be niche, it's just that most games that are successful without being on Steam are on console. Which is true in MC's case despite being a PC game, because many MC playerbase are bedrock/console players for the sole reason that bedrock edition is available on more platforms/devices (PC, mobile, PS, Xbox, Switch, etc.). There doesn't seem to be any exact statistic on this but I think it would be remiss to ignore the fact that accessibility on more platforms is what helps skyrocket a game into popularity if it doesn't already have the backing of a major company or investor (which in MC's case it's owned by the Microsoft overlords so it also has that going for it).

I don't think not being on one singular platform (Steam) is the reason why a game can remain niche. It's just that most indie games that find success do it by becoming downloadable software for console or end up on steam; there are very few exceptions to this rule that I can think of (so I'm not saying there are not examples either). If not, they usually remain on the itch.io indie circle.

And I don't think VS needs to be on more platforms to be successful (honestly I support the devs wanting to maintain control over their own game). It's just, we're comparing a niche PC/launcher-only game to a Microsoft-owned juggernaut with all the money and marketing it could ever need available on every single device. OP's post was about playerbases specifically but the former is fair to point out as a reason why some players might not make the jump AKA they don't play on PC. My point was about accessibility across multiple devices, not just Steam^^ And if VS remains a niche game compared to MC because of that, that's fine. Not everything needs to be a juggernaut.