Dungeons missed the mark a bit

[LadyWYT]

I've been sitting on this for a while, since procedural dungeons were very unfinished when first implemented. They still have a few more tweaks to go, I think, but overall I think what's there is what will make it to stable. Now I do like them, and they add more interesting stuff to find in a fashion that the previous ruins don't really cover, but for me, they also missed the mark by quite a bit. As a proof of concept, they're good, and I expect to see more dungeon types added in a later update(1.23?), but I think the impact would have been better if the procedural dungeons had been cut from 1.22 and added in 1.23 instead.

The main reason I say that, is that there's only one type of dungeon to find. The general layout and decor/loot within does vary a bit, but there are certain rooms that will always be present in exactly the same spots. After you've seen a couple, they stop being as interesting since you know almost exactly what you're going to find inside. However, if there had been 2-3 different types that could generate, then you wouldn't really know what you're getting when you find one until you decide to actually explore it. 

One thing I would love to see added to future dungeons, is some traps or puzzles to solve, as well as some enemies to fight. Granted, this is a little difficult to do when the player is allowed to break blocks within the dungeon, but I don't think traps/puzzles/enemies need to be in every dungeon, nor do they need to be as involved as the stuff in the story locations. Perhaps bits of wooden structures could collapse if stepped on, and require the player to watch their step and/or repair parts of the structure. "Traps" might just be bits of rusty scrap metal lying around that the player could poke themselves on if they aren't careful. 

In any case, I am happy that procedural dungeons made it into 1.22, and they're a decent proof-of-concept, but overall I think their addition would have had a stronger first impression if there had been a bit more variety up front.

[ifoz]

As much as I enjoy the dungeons as a proof of concept, I can't help but feel the same.
As they currently are, it's just a special somewhat larger ruin that is roughly the same in appearance and loot distribution each time you find one.
The central blast furnace room of the dungeons still seems to be a work in progress though, and I would bet that it will make it into the game by stable.


I sometimes also feel like they have less loot than regular ruins, depending on your RNG. Given their rarity I'd expect a little more, considering it is completely possible to find nothing of value in a dungeon. (Looting five chests in a large bedroom as an example and having them all be empty feels a little odd, if you were almost guaranteed at least one clothing item and some ruined cloth clutter I think that would make sense. From my experience it feels like a lot of loot randomisers in dungeons are set to only appear around 10-20% of the time).
When I find a new dungeon, I don't usually think "oh this is great, I'll explore this and get some loot!" I usually think "I wonder if it'll be empty again this time". 


The clutter makes the rooms feel very full, but in terms of actual loot there usually isn't much. I think this comes back around to how I think it would be nice if clutter would drop scraps of resources. There's so much cloth hanging from drying racks in those laundry rooms, yet I can't get even a single flax fibre out of it if all the chests are empty. There's ruined shoes on the shelves, but I can't salvage any leather. Having some clutter be able to occasionally drop scraps of basic resources would go a decent way to making dungeons feel more rewarding in my eyes, given the sheer amount of ruined clutter in them that can't be used for anything.

It's a strange feeling to step into a structure so cluttered, but then only be able to beeline for the few chests and hope they contain things. If they don't, everything else in those rooms might as well not be there.
(Clutter can be nice for decor, but there is a lot of it that is too ruined to really use as decoration in a normal base, and dungeons contain a lot of ruined clutter).


I think Elvas did mention that the lock-and-key system might make it into the 1.22._ patches, where the vault's iron door would be locked and you would need to search around for a key. That could add a bit of potential puzzle-solving and open the door for better loot rewards, but without guaranteed enemy spawns it also might just feel like a scavenger hunt for no particular reason.


All that aside, they are still really cool. I think the dungeon system is a great proof of concept, and there's an absolute ton of potential for having special ruins that are unique each time you find them.

Edited April 13 by ifoz

[EnbyKaiju]

I haven't had the chance to delve the dungeons yet, have been holding off till stable, but I can definitely get what you're both talking about. It really sounds like this first dungeon is the proof of concept more than anything else. A great big "Does this work? Can we make it a thing?", before they dedicate a lot more time to it.

I've no doubt that if this one works out well then they already have the tools in place they need to focus on both the design and functionality of the dungeons, every dev knows the hardest of building a game is making the tools for it first, and they are doing something that VS really hadn't been set up with the tools to do. I've a lot of trust that over the future builds the dungeons will get more interesting, more dynamic, and have the right kind of loot to make the experiences worthwhile. This kind of feedback is definitely the kind I'd be looking for when I do dev work.

[LadyWYT]

29 minutes ago, ifoz said:

I sometimes also feel like they have less loot than regular ruins, depending on your RNG. Given their rarity I'd expect a little more, considering it is completely possible to find nothing of value in a dungeon. (Looting five chests in a large bedroom as an example and having them all be empty feels a little odd, if you were almost guaranteed at least one clothing item and some ruined cloth clutter I think that would make sense. From my experience it feels like a lot of loot randomisers in dungeons are set to only appear around 10-20% of the time).
When I find a new dungeon, I don't usually think "oh this is great, I'll explore this and get some loot!" I usually think "I wonder if it'll be empty again this time". 

I've been wondering if the loot isn't a little bugged. That being said, this ruin does appear relatively safe to explore, so I wouldn't be surprised if adventurous traders had already picked over what loot was there. Of course, some of it could have rotted away over time too.

The ruins do seem to contain decent amounts of rot and sometimes powdered charcoal, which is pretty valuable for making compost and terra preta.

31 minutes ago, ifoz said:

(Clutter can be nice for decor, but there is a lot of it that is too ruined to really use as decoration in a normal base, and dungeons contain a lot of ruined clutter).

Not to mention that lots of clutter makes it really hard for a monster or two to spawn in the ruins, as well as difficult for the player to navigate. To be fair, the player is also allowed to break stuff in these ruins, which does help, especially in the cases where rubble needs to be cleared before the player is allowed to proceed.

 

33 minutes ago, ifoz said:

I think Elvas did mention that the lock-and-key system might make it into the 1.22._ patches, where the vault's iron door would be locked and you would need to search around for a key. That could add a bit of potential puzzle-solving and open the door for better loot rewards, but without guaranteed enemy spawns it also might just feel like a scavenger hunt for no particular reason.

This would be really cool if the devs can pull it off. I also think it would be fine without the enemy spawns. A scavenger hunt, yes, but the player will still need to invest their time into the scavenging. Having a low-stakes exploration opportunity would be pretty fun.

 

35 minutes ago, ifoz said:

All that aside, they are still really cool. I think the dungeon system is a great proof of concept, and there's an absolute ton of potential for having special ruins that are unique each time you find them.

Oh for sure! The modders will definitely have a field day with this system, I think.

 

8 minutes ago, EnbyKaiju said:

I haven't had the chance to delve the dungeons yet, have been holding off till stable, but I can definitely get what you're both talking about. It really sounds like this first dungeon is the proof of concept more than anything else. A great big "Does this work? Can we make it a thing?", before they dedicate a lot more time to it.

I've no doubt that if this one works out well then they already have the tools in place they need to focus on both the design and functionality of the dungeons, every dev knows the hardest of building a game is making the tools for it first, and they are doing something that VS really hadn't been set up with the tools to do. I've a lot of trust that over the future builds the dungeons will get more interesting, more dynamic, and have the right kind of loot to make the experiences worthwhile. This kind of feedback is definitely the kind I'd be looking for when I do dev work.

Most definitely. Like I said, I'm happy they managed to fit it in to the update, but I do think it's a case where they could have cut it in favor of polishing everything else a little faster, and shipped the dungeons at a later date with more variety. 

[ifoz]

7 minutes ago, LadyWYT said:

That being said, this ruin does appear relatively safe to explore, so I wouldn't be surprised if adventurous traders had already picked over what loot was there. Of course, some of it could have rotted away over time too.

As much as that could be the case from an in-world perspective, places like in the laundry and on the clutter shelves of bedrooms there is still a lot of (unobtainable) clothing, so it still seems strange to me that there can be so much implied to be around but absolutely none for the player to take.
 

7 minutes ago, LadyWYT said:

The ruins do seem to contain decent amounts of rot and sometimes powdered charcoal, which is pretty valuable for making compost and terra preta.

I'm pretty sure they nerfed the rot amount in a recent rc, the latest dungeon I found didn't have nearly as much as they used to.
They do actually have two guaranteed terra perta if you dig down inside the waste shaft, but I have never bothered to grab it myself, because from a roleplay perspective I doubt my Seraph would really want to go digging around in ancient sewage to grab some soil. 
 

7 minutes ago, LadyWYT said:

This would be really cool if the devs can pull it off. I also think it would be fine without the enemy spawns. A scavenger hunt, yes, but the player will still need to invest their time into the scavenging. Having a low-stakes exploration opportunity would be pretty fun.

It'd be nice if different future dungeon types had different levels of danger. Some more casual and low-stakes mainly focused on giving the player some decorative clutter and adding to the general atmosphere/environmental storytelling, and some that would be more dangerous with monsters/traps/etc.

Edited April 13 by ifoz

[ifoz]

26 minutes ago, LadyWYT said:

This would be really cool if the devs can pull it off. I also think it would be fine without the enemy spawns. A scavenger hunt, yes, but the player will still need to invest their time into the scavenging. Having a low-stakes exploration opportunity would be pretty fun.

Actually, thinking about it a bit more, it could be fun if the Malefactor had a class-exclusive lockpicking kit (or class-exclusive but also sold by treasure hunters) to sometimes let them bypass needing to search for keys, or making the theoretical lockpicking system easier in some way.

Edited April 13 by ifoz

[Teh Pizza Lady]

9 minutes ago, ifoz said:

Actually, thinking about it a bit more, it could be fun if the Malefactor had a class-exclusive lockpicking kit (or class-exclusive but also sold by treasure hunters) to sometimes let them bypass needing to search for keys, or making the theoretical lockpicking system easier in some way.

I see the ModDB that way. *points* Maybe someone will come up with a way to figure that one out. Probably a prime candidate for the suggestions forum. You'd have my vote if you did put it there.

[Michael Gates]

A thing I'm kind of wondering about is whether the guts of the dungeon generation system are available for modders. In an ideal world, "Better Dungeons" would be entirely plausible. Or add a couple of block types and make a mod for crashed alien spaceships.

[Teh Pizza Lady]

38 minutes ago, Michael Gates said:

A thing I'm kind of wondering about is whether the guts of the dungeon generation system are available for modders. In an ideal world, "Better Dungeons" would be entirely plausible. Or add a couple of block types and make a mod for crashed alien spaceships.

Most everything in the game is. Tyron said that everything they create, they try to make it extensible by the modding community.

Edited April 13 by Teh Pizza Lady

[jerjerje]

11 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

In any case, I am happy that procedural dungeons made it into 1.22, and they're a decent proof-of-concept, but overall I think their addition would have had a stronger first impression if there had been a bit more variety up front.

I generally agree that the current dungeons could be more interesting, but I can think of two reasons for why the devs might have wanted it in this update. (Note: This is purely speculative)

The first reason: Maybe the devs didn't want to have yet another thing be postponed. We already had rivers and the status affect system postponed to a future update. Maybe the devs simply didn't want to have a third thing be removed from the roadmap. I could easily see players get annoyed at that.

The second reason: Bugs! With a system as complex as procedural dungeons, it can be very difficult to account for all edge cases. There are so many variables that the dungeon generation can break in many unexpected ways. By giving modders access to this system before it's used (much), the devs can solve a lot of bugs before they become problems for vanilla. This is especially important since dungeons are a part of world gen. A dungeon that spawns broken won't be fixed by future updates! So it's important to get this right the first time.

Overall I definitely agree that it's good the procedural dungeons made it into the update at all. I'm looking forward to seeing what they do with the system in the future.

[ifoz]

Came back here to add in a little bit of additional feedback:
Dungeons should probably have some internal limit to the amount of room pieces they can reuse in one room. Maybe two or three times maximum for one room.
I just found a room made of the same corner piece for all four corners, resulting in this strange ruined lantern pit. 

[LadyWYT]

5 hours ago, ifoz said:

Dungeons should probably have some internal limit to the amount of room pieces they can reuse in one room. Maybe two or three times maximum for one room.
I just found a room made of the same corner piece for all four corners, resulting in this strange ruined lantern pit. 

Haha, probably, but this is a pretty funny find. Maybe everyone had gone delirious and made up some strange rituals to pass the time?

[Facethief]

How do you even find these? I would assume they spawn underground if they were inhabited. Do they spawn in the same even-spaced way as traders that makes them easy to find once you’ve found two neighboring ones?

Edited April 15 by Facethief

[Krähenwolf]

On 4/14/2026 at 9:53 AM, ifoz said:

Came back here to add in a little bit of additional feedback:
Dungeons should probably have some internal limit to the amount of room pieces they can reuse in one room. Maybe two or three times maximum for one room.
I just found a room made of the same corner piece for all four corners, resulting in this strange ruined lantern pit. 

I mean, this goes very well with the Resonance Archives, doesn't it? The bell room with its shelves upon shelves upon shelves upon..., for example, or the nobles quarters with its weird, repeating metal-growth?

[LadyWYT]

4 hours ago, Facethief said:

How do you even find these? I would assume they spawn underground if they were inhabited. Do they spawn in the same even-spaced way as traders that makes them easy to find once you’ve found two neighboring ones?

They aren't inhabited but they do spawn underground, with an entry point at the surface. The entrance looks like a small mound of dirt, typically in a flat area(if in a gravel plain the mound may be a different color of rock than the surface sand/gravel), and will have a small set of rusty metal doors blocks off by crumbling drystone.

According to the patch notes, the dungeons can be found roughly every 1500 blocks, so they're not a common occurrence but they aren't exceedingly rare either. Currently they do seem to spawn rather consistently, so once you've found one or two it becomes easier to predict where to find others. I would actually say traders are less predictable at the moment, since while traders do follow a certain spacing pattern they can also spawn closer to each other or further apart now than they did before.

2 hours ago, Krähenwolf said:

I mean, this goes very well with the Resonance Archives, doesn't it? The bell room with its shelves upon shelves upon shelves upon..., for example, or the nobles quarters with its weird, repeating metal-growth?

Oh it does, but if this particular dungeon is supposed to be more "normal" then that kind of weirdness probably isn't desirable.

[Facethief]

26 minutes ago, LadyWYT said:

They aren't inhabited

well, "were" past tense, as in during the rotting era of the game

[Zane Mordien]

I just consider the dungeons as a work in progress. It's a good start and I'm sure some modder will go crazy with it. They make more sense than the random underground ruins in my opinion. Although I guess maybe they should have a translocator in them or at least a broken one.