Andael

Here, you're replying to CastIronFabric, but I'm pretty sure it was Blaiyze who was talking of on-ramp for early game. CastIronFabric's rigid stance is basically that Storms are bad unless they never interfere (eg. you "go to them"), much like they turn off hostility because they don't like being interrupted by a wolf or a bear. They also seem to expect everyone to realize playing their way is the right way. I really don't think you're in much agreement with that. My understanding is that you want adversity. I do too, but with more nuance and care -- less random-rolls; more systems.

I am mostly in agreement here. Though I feel like the "fair initial start" is long overdue for improvement. I'd even be happy to have a hint of the devs' plan here... are Temporal Storms "mostly as intended"? Or a placeholder with plans but more pieces need to fall into place? Some of the player base expects more enticing gameplay from them, or at least some less obnoxious spawn rules. If they're "basically done", then it's open to mods to offer improvements. If there're big plans, then mods might be a waste of effort. I'm willing to wait for the vision to be realised. But if this part of it is finished, I'd be waiting... for nothing to come.

No, I've been waiting for the latest release to go stable before I start a fresh run up through everything to this point. I have completed the Resonance Archives twice. I've read the four(?) collections in the Archives, and a smattering of other lorebooks/tapestries collected from panning or ruins. You think they're not great, but just fine. I think they're not fine but an adequate placeholder -- really in need of a degree of improvement compared to most of the game. The Storms are trivially implemented and haven't really changed (aside from some spawn-tables when the new creatures were added). My major problem is that spawns are simply random checks anywhere around, allowing the chance to appear behind you and attack even as they're "materializing". You don't have a problem with that. Many people do, hence the arguments and people not arguing because they've quit playing even though they might really like the more richly designed aspects of the game. As a game developer myself, my greatest pet-peeve is trivial "spawning" -- it's just rude to players, and lame. Next problem is all tiers capable of spawning at any storm intensity. A player can't have a sense of "oh, this one is light, I can probably weather it, or maybe try..." Instead, most people just try to ignore/avoid every storm -- hiding in a tiny room or coffin, if not outright disabling storms. Because any storm can drop a nightmare on your ass. And I've been ganked like this far too many times. Arguments that it's "not a problem for you" are not valid, sorry. That's the nature of statistics when you choose random-chance of effect and random-table. It basically means in a large enough player population, someone will be very unlucky and have that utterly dumb experience. (My second peeve in games: the "random roll".) I want the Storms, and I want drifters able to spawn inside (I've never had the impression that you should feel completely safe in a storm) -- but I want there to be better mechanics involved in the storms. Enough to encourage some interaction and experimentation rather than outright avoiding or deciding storms are shit. Light/dark is one of the few influencing factors the game communicates to me about spawns. But it also seems pretty inconsistent. I think several aspects can be improved by spawns being more restricted by light (only darker shadows), but allow storms to overcome a well-lit home by altering light -- a local zone of rust-world/past doesn't have this light, creating a local dimming effect and more opportunity for spawn... but a player can bring a lantern into darkening corners... or cower and deal with what crawls out of the darkness. Carrying a lantern would then be an effective deterrent against nearby spawns (rather than some arbitrary rule of player-proximity). There are many ways to build gameplay out of Temporal Storms -- but you're right that none of us know enough to mesh with all the lore we haven't been privy to. I hope there are plans for more to be done, and think it's a sore-spot in the game currently. If not, then it seems like ripe territory for a mod. I wish people didn't feel like the way to play VS was with Storms disabled... but I also can't really fault them with Storms as they are.

All of these fail to be good solutions for those of us, like the topic-creator Tabulius, who like the idea of the Storms but see them as a poorly implemented placeholder which is a current weak-point in the game with many much better fleshed-out aspects.

Yeah, for all the vast range of mods, there really are none that deal with Temporal Storms in a significant way. Soon after starting to play Vintage Story I began making notes about ideas for them, thinking maybe I'd pursue this. I am a programmer, specifically games... but my preferred environment is Linux+Vim and not the Visual Studio/JetBrains/IDE situation... and as I hemmed and hawed about setting that up I started to think that Temporal Storms seem so placeholder that Tyron must have intention to do a major rework there. Then I posted here -- oops, on reddit! -- asking about what that intent might be -- getting no answer on that, but rather a friendly "turn them off if you don't like them" from the community. I decided I was too fresh to VS, and jumping into this might be too much a can-o-worms. I feel like I have enough sense of the game now, with a few playthroughs up through the Resonance Archives and some romps through Wilderness Survival. If I knew "this is it -- Temporal Storms are basically as intended", that would be great incentive to pursue a mod to rework them.

We already have enemies to travel to, in the form of deep caverns and story locations. If storms were a thing you prepared for and went to, that's not much different than spelunking into an infested cavern... aside from the lack of glitch effects (well... that will begin with time too). Though simply standing in a rift accomplishes this too: "storm" at will. The potential value in a "raid" type event is to encourage preparation. To throw adversity against a player, which the player can then advance to overcome. Somewhat like seasonal change. But with seasonal change, the game has a lot of design around preparation for winter: ways to mitigate cold, to preserve and store food, and even keep fresh supplies with livestock and greenhouses. With Temporal Storm, it feels like there isn't much design. The storms are random spawns, while players have general tech advancement of weapons and armor, and application of building in ways which exploit implementation details. CastIronFabric, I am in agreement with your concerns/complaints about making a nicely lit place which has drifters spawn, and with the implications against outdoor forges. I, too, like to make some nice lighting with varied illumination levels (rather than flat bright bland illumination). I also have problems with (and hate) Nightmare Drifters spawning behind me in my decently-lit home to insta-kill me. To me, the problem is that they're not really designed, but rather a simple implementation of a rough idea. A fleshed-out design and implementation should encourage the strengths of the game, and offer a compelling reason to interact rather than disabling or simply biding-time during a storm. You've stated clearly that you're not interested at all -- so you should be well served by the option to disable them, as you do. I'm curious if you want to add input to Storm discussions because you might be interested in some different implementation?

I think that's a reasonable summary of what Temporal Storms are now -- at least the experience I get from them. But do you think the idea should be given a fleshed-out design and implementation which ideally enriches gameplay... Or just be removed? I think I agree with your sentiment here too. I feel like the effort of fighting drifters (and harvesting, often under hostile conditions) feels worthless -- leading to ignoring them as much as possible. Maybe that's the intent? Just a mostly-pointless threat? I don't know. I'd prefer some kind of incentive to engage with the mechanics of the game. In the large-scale, there is incentive to build better gear to survive (against everything) easier. Yet there still isn't much worth to actually killing drifters aside from preventing them from harming yourself. The occasional flax or gears are a small something in the early game, and I don't know what else might be sensible. But I know fighting them is frustrating partly because it's feels pointless right now.

I agree with Tabulius. Temporal Storms are a good concept, but poorly implemented. They fit the lore. I like the glitch effects and atmosphere. Raids, in games, can add tension and strategy... and encourage the use of game-mechanics and preparation... But as the Storm are, they randomly spawn rust-mobs near players, with very limited effective options for a player to deal with them -- mostly cheesing implementation details rather than intentional design. That just leaves potential gameplay on the table. I have assumed that the implementation of Temporal Storms is a placeholder. Simple spawn mechanic, marking the basic idea. But I haven't read of any more fleshed-out design intent, and the small changes to the mechanics (mostly around the addition of new rust-entities) as-is are a bit worrying as a hint that the current implementation is not so placeholder, or has just become accepted. I also don't turn them off, because they're an intentional part of the game, and there's some in-game value (Jonas parts + gears). Also, now that I use the Temporal Symphony mod, the warning of an approaching storm tends to elicit the spine-tingling raising of hackles, which adds some excitement. But I don't like the actual storms. Insta-gib from behind by a random tier-4 spawn is not exciting or fun. They're simply too random. Severity of storm doesn't even matter much, as any can spawn high-tier. Vintage Story's combat is not it's strong-suit, so bunny-hopping all over with reticle-based poke/targeting is not my favourite bit of gameplay to stress. I do like building crafty bunkers/traps, but more success is gained through cheese than innovation, since there isn't really much design toward this. I think the idea of Drifters coming from darkness, or time being more unstable in darkness should be a focal point. Storms might involve a breakdown of this... maybe like the uplifting black particles: larger patches of rising dimness. Maybe lightsources can become unstable (more advanced sources being more stable perhaps). Some visible, sensible, mechanism which can be worked against in the moment (eg. bolstering a darkening corner with light), and with craftable improvements to work for in the long-term. Maybe unstable/dark regions can grow/fester if not overcome by light. Even if a player fails to hold back the darkness -- at the very least they know where to expect creatures to come from. Rather than a random spawn from behind. Maybe some later-tech improvements like a flashlight or hooded lantern (might not be practical with the lighting in the engine?) -- intensity might be able to dissipate flickering-in drifters and rapidly banish encroaching darkness where focused. I've watched players cover their abodes with stones in an attempt to thwart spawns... and didn't like that it might work, or the activity it encouraged (drudgery, which also interferes with nice builds and freedom to place things on ground). Of course they're trying to do something, but that wouldn't be good gameplay even if intentionally designed. The important take-away should be that people do want to feel like they have some control over this -- give them mechanics and tools which encourage good gameplay. If impregnating your building materials with something, or placing fancy deterrents is part of this -- that sounds potentially neat, but with some intentional design! Spawns should not be so random, or powerful spawns must be easier to avoid when new: Storm intensity should related to spawned tiers, so you can have some sense of survivability (eg. vs your current armor). Perhaps spawn types relate to technology (I don't know if this can fit lore), so that the risk of higher threats increases as you progress. More powerful drifters might appear in response to killing weaker ones, though we don't want to ultimately discourage fighting back, but rather a test of power... so, overkill or speed of killing as a measure. Perhaps more powerful enemies are more light sensitive, so only a risk in the darkest of spots, and even requiring several adjacent dark cells. Rather than typical random-chance + random-table "rolls", a population distribution with random-shuffle -- this allows for better control over the randomness. Notification of storms: Where does "A Heavy Temporal Storm is approaching" even come from? A feeling? It would be better if there was a gameworld/thematic hint -- momentary glitches and sound, or maybe the floating black particles presage a full storm. (The mod "Temporal Symphony" does a nice job of this.) Maybe some early-ish tech helps presage a warning. And later Jonas-device could detect with more accuracy. Temporal Storms should bring to the game: A looming threat to prepare for -- with means to prepare. Fair value to be gained from engaging with and beating the threat (temporal gears lose their lustre after you have many, and Jonas parts are very late-game). Ideally, encourage the use of gameplay mechanics, such as building or tech-progression. Another consideration should be some intended player-experiences from the early-game through to late-game. Early-game options to engage with a light storm? Maybe simple traps, and an off-hand torch to deter near-spawns? Bowtorn are just rude early-game, I think... and reveals too much too soon. They should be related to heavier storms and deeper caves; maybe surface varietes near deep-cave mouths. Right now Storms are kinda cool and spooky at first... but not fun unless you like minecraft-style combat or cheesing implementation details.

I have a particular constraint which limits me from most of the big VS streamers: I like to watch first playthroughs, ideally blind -- fresh to Vintage Story. Extra ideally a couple or trio. I have no interest in tutorials or updates of new features, or playthroughs by experienced players -- I'd rather play than watch that kind of material. I really liked Mongster's playthrough. Super easy voice to listen to, with good dose of wonder and appreciation at the world. A deep well of patience with dogged persistence -- how else does one make a mansion with stone tools!? Currently enjoying DavaMoose: two adventurers trying to make their way in the vanilla game with default settings. And Flipsie: who played a small amount previous, but is now at about the limit of their knowledge (early copper) and is this time joined with a partner. They're playing with settings and mods which favour more physical simulation, adding the kinds of challenges they like from games. I prefer more physical/immersive settings too. Swootie's narrative National Geographic style of story was a bit of a change for me, but I quite enjoyed. The AI-voice didn't throw me off I think because I never heard anyone using that particular voice before -- now when I hear it occasionally in other circumstances it rings a bit false. TimmyTwoNipples is often mentioned -- and I did really like his first playthrough, which I think was a couple of years ago. I like to re-experience the "game as intended" (roughly) from a fresh perspective. Unfortunately this means I don't watch the large number of well-estabished Vintage Story content-creators, as they already know the game!

I played a few Wilderness Survival games and used all of the mentioned techniques: before saw: short pillars with different "value" material to represent prospects after saw: signs -- and by this time a lot more prospected locations, so the detail and clarity is needed for elusive deposits: grid-paper with prospecting values and depths of shafts explored With the grid-paper, I just chose a scale (eg. 8m per grid), and relied on visually measuring terrain, or counting while mining tunnels. Becomes quick/automatic with some practice. As Chuckerton mentioned, you could use books to keep things in-game... while immersive, it could be really tedious without easy spatial mapping! There's a bunch of "Craftable Cartography" mod variations which seem quite interesting for added gameplay without the "automapping", but providing means to make tools which help navigate and maintain a player-held map. Something like this might be perfect for immersive prospecting. I mostly play vanilla, but now I'm kinda interested in this.

I second that! I rarely use mods in any game, but TemporalSymphony is a must for Vintage Story, specifically for the temporal storm warning. It makes Temporal Storms more exciting, with that little surprise appetizer. Sometimes my hair stands on end when I'm really focused on something then hear the "gears of the world" rumbling with the visual effects, plus the bells tolling. Far more immersive than a "chat message" -- which is an understandable placeholder, but... well, I'm hoping the reason nothing more has been done in so long is that Tyron has big plans. Otherwise, please incorporate into base-game! I wish that new players could experience the game with it as their intro to temporal storms rather than "a light temporal storm is approaching".

I've watched a lot of people play Vintage Story and Valheim. Some are like you CastIronFabric, in that they really want to focus on what they want to do and when the world upsets that... it really upsets them. While I can understand that... It's not me at all. People are different. And it's not "mistaking engagement with satisfaction", like a person has to be broken or confused to have different preferences than yours. I prefer a dynamic game-world with understandable challenges to my intentions. If I can outright make a plan and execute on it, that's quite boring for me. The masterstroke of Valheim, IMHO, is emergent gameplay -- you want to gather resources, explore, and make progress, but as you push on the environment, it pushes back. It adds tension, loss, victory... catalysts for epic stories! The interruptions are frustrating to me. I don't like them when they happen. But if I just mine, mine, mine... that gets boring. And if there's nothing to challenge my activities in the world, it's just a sandbox to play in... which stays boring. So, while I'm annoyed when interrupted, I overall prefer that it does happen. Also, some of the best adventures are misadventures -- you don't plan them, but you struggle to overcome them.

Why such a "hard stop"? For me, any "non-shooter" is preferably either third-person, or first-person via VR. First-person through a screen has too many limitations and leads to quirky implementation choices. Sense of a character's body in the world is poor with first-person (screen). This impacts melee combat and more complex navigation like climbing or careful footwork. Vintage Story at least doesn't have too much for "platforming", but it does have melee combat which I feel is a weak-point, largely with the minecraft-esque object-at-reticle as the focus for evaluating combat. Weapons become abstracted as a distance of interaction along this reticle-ray, rather than something like a physical arc through the world. Focused work like knap/clayform/forge are good in first-person. But I'd really prefer more body-sense while out in the world. That said, Vintage Story is designed with certain choices made already, and I wouldn't change it. But for my own designs of a "survival-craft", you'd better believe it's majorly third-person (exceptions being aimed actions and focused work).

This complaint I can understand, and agree. The initial spawn is far too random. First time I played I started trapped inside trees+shrubs, couldn't see and just punched the branches to end up falling from a cliff edge because I was also on a steep cliff. It was not a great initial impression. I'd say more than half of my new-game starts have been "randomly unfortunate" -- start points I wouldn't want to introduce a new player with. Valheim is an excellent game on so many counts, and its rather tame and mostly-controlled start in a generated world is pretty well done. However, the first time I played Valheim, before I could read the first thing Hugin had to say, I was being attacked by a neck. Having no time to figure out controls I ran -- no, walked because I didn't try L1 on the controller (I later came to appreciate the choice of L1) -- while testing buttons. But that brought a boar and a greyling to the train following me and I died. Respawned, only to die before the screen fully faded in... repeat for 10 minutes. I exited, saying "My Dad will not be able to play this", as it was the time of covid and I was looking for multiplayer games to play with family between cities. I never had such an unlucky start again in Valheim, over the next 30-or-so(!) times I've played. But my point is that even with their pretty-well controlled start, there's enough random that someone's going to have a bad initial impression. As a game-developer myself, I often consider the statistical outliers. Relying on statistical norms as "typical player experience" ignores the fact that some un/fortunate players will experience the edge case -- and I consider how bad that can be.

Faerador, I feel the same way. I've been playing Vintage Story since last year, and I mentally treat "Medium" rift activity as could-be-nearly-Apocalyptic. Really, results vary broadly for any given rift-activity. But when my home feels ready to be lifted off its foundation by the weight of drifters outside... I assume it's a Medium or Apocalyptic night... and when I check, it's usually Medium. I honestly will feel more comfortable going out in Very High activity than Medium. What seems correct: the number of rifts, as Faerador also reports. Medium doesn't have high rift density. What seems wrong: the number of drifters is *often* (but not always) higher than "High" or "Very High" activity. In my mind, I keep imagining there's a switch statement that for some reason falls through to Apocalyptic when the activity is Medium... maybe for the target drifter population? Perhaps the times when Medium isn't so bad it's because of the few rifts around curtailing the ability to reach a higher population? Speculation, as I don't know the mechanics of spawning. I've had some memorable cases while I'm caught exploring... drifters practically raining down off a ledge like a waterfall. When I check and see "Medium" I'm not surprised. What annoys me the most about this, is that Medium seems to be rather common, and results in many nights of smithing or other activity suffering this horrible cacophony. Such that in my mind it's a signature part of Vintage Story: the cacophony of night. Maybe playing a tune on the Resonator could calm their blather... giving more value to building/owning one.