Jump to content

KobaltKookie

Vintarian
  • Content Count

    23
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About KobaltKookie

  • Rank
    Stone Age Settler

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. That would be a good solution to having more variety in world generation, while still keeping a multi-landform system. Multi-landform systems can still be as good as a single landform system with lots of variation (like Minecraft Alpha), as long as these landforms aren't super restricted, giving them way more variety, and making them less same-y. These mutators would have to be pretty unrestricted too however. Otherwise, you'll eventually recognize all the landforms again, just with the different mutators applied to them.
  2. Yeah I agree, there should be multiple progression trees in VT. Although adding all these new suggestions is going to take a long time for the developers. If they were to make a small update now, I think it should be all about communicating to the player better, updating the survival guide so new players aren't lost completely. Don't hold their hands too much, but give them a little nudge in the right direction.
  3. Made a mistake there in that post, I was referring to the amount of variety in one specific preset/landform, not the world generation itself. Minecraft Alpha/Beta is basically one preset/landform, and that one landform has more variety then one specific landform in VT. And yes, those features that exist in Minecraft Alpha/Beta do exist in VT, however they exist as presets, so they aren't as fluid or diverse as their Alpha/Beta Minecraft counterpart. You can easily what I mean in @junawood's 5th and 10th screenshot he posted. Those mountains are very clearly a mountain preset surrounded by a plains preset/landform. I do agree VT overall has more variety though, since it has lots of different landforms, but those landforms are restrictive, and look very similar to each other because of it. I'll edit that previous post to avoid further confusion about this.
  4. Yes, if you play Alpha/Beta enough you can start to notice a pattern, but even with just those five points you've brought up, it already has way more variety then one of the specific presets in VT. There was certainly room for improvement to make it even more diverse, and take longer to notice a pattern, but it was already quite good. Besides, it's impossible to have true randomness in a computer, you'll pick up a pattern eventually, it's just some world generators are better at hiding patterns and repetition then others. With really restricted multi-landform terrain generators, you can start to pick up a pattern quite quickly, unless if you have tons of different landforms. I agree with you here, Minecraft world generation went in the wrong direction when Beta 1.8 was released, turning world generation into large biome/landform presets very similar to each other. Old world generation looks bad in modern versions because in order for modern versions to cover up the new repetitive beta 1.8 terrain, they needed to greatly increase the amount of trees and other foliage on the ground. Another factor for the old world generation looking bad in modern versions is the terrain's color is extremely bland, not very saturated. They did this to make the game look more realistic, and it works okay with a more realistic terrain generator, but not as well with an unrealistic one (which isn't necessarily a bad thing, unless if it's too unrealistic to the point you can't even tell it's terrain anymore).
  5. Though, you can still have a very diverse world with a multi-landform system. You just have to make sure these landforms restrict the terrain very lightly, so there's still a lot of variety within one landform. Because there's only so much randomness a computer can make with set parameters, so tweaking those parameters slightly in different spots in the world (different landforms) would be a good solution to add even more diversity.
  6. One giant world generation algorithm = basically one giant "landform" with a lot of variety (and yes, in order for it to work in VT, landforms will have to be bigger). As a developer myself, I am aware there needs to be some parameters, but the more parameters you add, the more the world generation starts looking like familiar presets, making it far less likely to be surprised by the world generation. Those realistic mountains you modded into the game look good and realistic, but it's unlikely it'll surprise you with bizarre terrain generation, or have a lot of variety, since you've restricted what the terrain can look like greatly. Not saying there's no positives to using landforms, because as you said, you can create terrain that would otherwise be impossible without a landform system. But if you use a landform system, then it's up to you to add variety to the world generation, not the computer. The only variety with a landform system besides small differences in the landforms themselves, would be the randomness in where they appear. And yeah, Minecraft Alpha and Beta generation was bland a lot of the times due to it having a lot of randomness, but that's what made stumbling into crazy world generation more exciting, it was uncommon. There needs to be a good balance of bland terrain and interesting terrain, so interesting terrain is more valuable. Here's three different screenshots of three different worlds I just generated in early Minecraft Alpha. All three look different from each other, without any use of a multi-landform system. This is because having bland terrain, and interesting terrain is a good thing. It allows the world generation to be more diverse, and as I said earlier, makes finding interesting terrain more exciting. You do sacrifice a lot of control and realism if you don't use a landform system, but as a pro, you get a lot more diverse terrain generation, without writing any specific code to generate specific terrain. Both systems have their own pros and cons, although I'd argue not using a landform system is better for a giant, randomly generated open world game like Minecraft and VT.
  7. Even if landforms are detached from everything and are different from biomes, they still have the same problem. There's certainly a lot more variation with landforms, but the problem still persists that landforms are presets, and not random enough. Instead of the computer controlling the randomness and height of the terrain, the built in landform presets are. So in order to add more variation, you'd have to add more landform presets, just like you'd have to add more biomes in Minecraft. There should just be one big world generation algorithm, determining the shape of the all the terrain, then another algorithm for adding vegetation, soil material, etc. This is how it was done for the old Minecraft Alpha and Beta, and I think it would work really well with Vintage Story. Although completely scraping the current landform system would take a long time, I'd still be willing to wait for it.
  8. Yes, revamping world generation would take a long time, but it would be worth the wait. As Shigeru Miyamoto said, "A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad". Same could be said for updates, I think a longer solution, rather then a quick solution would be better for the game. Looking forward to one day seeing the update!
  9. I don't actually mind traveling an extremely long distance to find limestone or chalk, as long as the journey doesn't get repetitive. That journey did get repetitive for me, and I have some solutions for that. I think their should be more of a variety of ruins, or other new generated structures. These new structures should be larger, and should contain more items that incentivize the player to explore them. Also, I think updating the world generation would help too. It's pretty good right now, but I think it can be improved. The way I think it should be changed is not letting biomes control the height scaling of the world. What made Minecraft Alpha and Beta terrain so interesting was how random and bizarre it could get. It didn't matter which biome you were in at that time, the terrain generation could be a flat plain, or a giant overhang reaching the height limit. I think Minecraft modern generation is plagued by it's biomes now, because it's biomes determine the height scaling, there's not enough variation. An example is once you've seen one plains biome in Minecraft, you've basically seen all the plains biomes in the game. Vintage Story has this problem too, but not as badly as Minecraft. I've noticed most VT biomes don't restrict the height scaling as much as Minecraft does, which is actually why I prefer VT world generation over Minecraft's, despite VT having less biomes. For me, what makes mountains exciting to see in a sandbox exploration game is not expecting to see them. If giant mountains only appear in mountain biomes, then their not as exciting because you'll know when to expect them, when you enter a mountain biome, and only when you enter a mountain biome. Moving on, I think the game shouldn't have a shortcut mechanic. Too many toggles to customize the gameplay would create too many different ways to play. It's good to have diverse game customizations to appeal to different players, but too much customization might be overwhelming for a new player. If lime and chalk remains possibly being thousands of blocks away from the spawnpoint, I think the world generation should be updated to have even more variety, to keep players more interested on their search. Or, a simpler fix could be making lime and chalk less rare. I noticed the main stone type changes as you explore, maybe make the stone type switch more frequently so you won't have to travel as long to find a specific stone. And, instead of picking a random number each time the world generation changes the stone type (I'm assuming that's how it works), randomize a list of each stone id. So when the stone type changes, use the next stone id on the list until you've reached the end of the list, then randomize the list again. That way it's confirmed you'll eventually find the stone you're looking for. Otherwise it's possible for the computer to pick the same number over and over again, making the journey take way longer. Last thing I want to mention for now that I think would help is being more informative to a new player. The survival guide is okay, but I think it should seriously be updated to help guide the player better. An example is I would've had no idea to dig below copper lumps to find more if I didn't see it on the wiki. If I didn't know about this, it would've taken 10 times longer, perhaps even more then that, to get all the copper I'd need. It's probably difficult for many new players to get a grasp of the game, especially if they never use the wiki. So the survival guide should be more clear and informative, so that new players don't get lost and quit. I know some people like not being told how to play, and like having to figure out stuff on their own, which in some cases works. But Vintage Story's game mechanics are too complex to take that approach. An example is I'd have no clue how to make charcoal if I hadn't had seen it on the wiki. It would be extremely rare for somebody to just stumble on how to make charcoal randomly.
  10. Minecraft live happened today, and with it, a lot of new announced features. Two of these new features look, and act very similar to two of Vintage Story's. You can now dig up dirt and gravel to find items inside of it, very similar to Vintage Story's panning system. Clay pots will be added to the game too, difference here being you can add little ceramics to these pots. They too, like Vintage Story can be fired. Difference here is you do it over an actual fire, not a campfire like you do in VT. Interesting how these features are making it to the game, perhaps a Minecraft developer was inspired by some of Vintage Story's game mechanics.
  11. I 100% agree, it's why I named this post "Problems I have with Vintage Story", not "Problems with Vintage Story". Clearly, many people in the VT community don't find the problems I personally have with VT to be an issue for them. However, I think it's good for a game to receive criticism from many different players, with different playstyles and opinions. It'll help a game improve appealing to a wide variety of players. And while yes, it's impossible to have a game nobody has a problem with, you can still make a game appeal to more players. The issues I brought up I feel will be issues for a lot of other new players too. That's why I've been giving suggestions throughout this thread on ways Vintage Story could improve based upon what I like to see in these types of games. To be clear, I'm not bashing the game for the problems I brought up, they aren't necessarily problems for everyone, and elements of the game I had a problem with may be elements of the game you really enjoy. This is why I brought these issues up, because I believe many new players will have a similar mindset and playstyle that I have. However, I know most of the Vintage Story community likes the way the game is played. I just think the game's playstyle in it's current state will prevent it from being widespread, since it's playstyle isn't appealing to many sandbox exploration game players. Not saying the playstyle is bad, clearly it isn't as a good amount of people enjoy it, but it may prevent the community from growing larger and more diverse. However, if it's not in the developer's interest to make it more widespread, and are perfectly fine with the playerbase it has now, then the problems I brought up can be nullified. Thanks @Tyron and the rest of the team for creating Vintage Story, despite some problems I personally have with it, I really do like the game and was well worth the money spent.
  12. This is more of just an example to make the end of the journey more interesting. Everyone has their own opinion of the matter. If you enjoy these trips, that's cool. I personally think there is room for improvement though, as it didn't take long for my trips to feel repetitive. Yeah, you can get a decent amount of things. Although most of what I got, I wasn't interested in. Would not hurt the game in the slightest to add even more things to find, like special weapons, accessories, etc. The stuff I lost was durability on my tools, and food. Although, I have a solution to the food problem now, and that's just to take berries along the way, they're everywhere. I'm aware the game already has some special items in the ruins, but there could still be room for improvement like I said earlier. Also, these special items should be more common, as I didn't get much of them on my long travels, despite checking every ruin I found above and below ground.
  13. I should elaborate on what I meant by punishing. I was more referring to spending too much time searching for limestone, too much time consumption being the punishment. But, you're right it's not completely a loss if you don't end up finding what you're looking for. An example is I didn't end up finding limestone, but I found a lot sphalerite for making bronze, and was able to find traders that sold decent stuff. And yeah, berry bushes do eliminate having to expend food too, I didn't actually think of that until now. As you said though, exploration can still be greatly improved. There should still be more alternative things to find if you don't end up finding the main thing your after.
  14. You're right, right now they're currently not a real challenge, and more of just a nuisance. You can just build a dirt tower, or sleep through it all. However it was interesting to me on my first temporal storm, seeing the world go dark and distorted, but I quickly got tired of it. It's a cool idea in theory, but terribly executed. There's too much camera distortion, and nothing new or interesting comes out during these storms, just drifters. The temporal storms could be improved by first, lessening the camera distortion greatly, then adding unique creatures that only appear in the storm, and unique items that you can collect from these creatures.
  15. The items being extremely well balanced would be the best option. If they were non-essential, then there wouldn't be much of an incentive to explore these ruins. And if it was a long collectathon, you would still eventually collect everything, and no longer have a reason to explore the ruins. Some of the items you could get from these ruins should be ruin exclusive too, meaning you'd only find these special items there, further incentivizing players to explore ruins.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.