CastIronFabric

yeah not on board with making excuses for exaggerations over setting the record correct. regardless, on the question itself. I do not actually care I never play with aggression on.

If bowtorns would 100% accurate I would have never seen their spears and wonder why I could not pick them up. 1. I am calling BS on that claim 2. I am not even sure how one could reliably prove that claim 3. I am see bowtorn spears...so.... 'yeah I that is because you moved!' 'ok, well, then that would not be 100% accurate now would it'?

I am sure some people play for stories but I do not. More over -the best selling games of all time are mostly non-story based games. -games have existed for thousands of years before the computer and all of them are not story based, chess, football, golf. Its not like the concept of gaming started when D&D hit the world and never existed before it. -I would venture to say that the vast majority of VS players have no idea what the 'story' of VS is. -'play' and 'gaming' are actually always the same thing. Gaming is a FORM of play. So for example when you are kid 'playing' cops and robbers one might say 'hey lets give this a break and play a game instead'. They understand its different. Play is free form, games are working within a ruleset. I encourage you to watch this video. Its a standard 'how to feel good about life' lecture that is famous for Tedx which I am not a fan of but most of it gives a foundation of what I am talking about https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFapT0I8ujs

stories you say. The foundation of gaming for you is the story? stories is the main reason you play games do I have that correct? Ok well consider this, games have existed for thousands of years and stories have always been possible and yet for the vast majority of human history games have not been story based. why do you think that is? I am not sure if this is the lecture I watched and I personally am not a fan of Tedx talks. I think Tedx is not as serious as Ted talks. With all that said, what I have rewatched on this video is not 100% what I said but its a good start to understand what I am talking about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFapT0I8ujs

I am a fan of the double insulation affect. I am not a fan of making mechanics that favor underground cellars, despite the fact that I almost exclusively use underground cellars. Why? The same reason I am not a fan of lighting strikes affecting grass tiles, it seriously impedes my design choices. Yes..I play this game for the sims and doll house affects, thank you.

The argument I have heard about games both now and in ancient times is to test ones abilities against a somewhat unpredictable circumstance, basically a 'practice' for real life. In ancient context that is fairly easy to understand. war games that test soldiers abilities that they will need in battle, ok got it. However how does that translate into the Sims? perhaps testing ones design abilities should one ever want to remodel their house at some point, I dont know. I could get into that deeply but I aint gonna

yeah it sounds like your really well on your way. Given I play on 'Explorer Mode' I now make a mad dash to about 10,000 blocks right at spawn where I can grow nearly everything almost year round. 20,000 is a bit to far for that sweet spot of farming though

Well to be fair, posting this question and reading everyones responses is not too much different than reading online guides be it video or otherwise. The only progression tips other than (things that keep me alive right now) 1. If you stay in the spawn area think about winter. Primary winter clothes and food supply that can last. 2. Try to get as much flax growing as you can without the search for flax impeding objective number 1 3. If you have time and are thinking about doing a ton of digging for whatever long term goal you have, consider waiting until bronze age. (disclaimer: this is just my personal opinion I do not want to advocate that I consider these two things to be an immutable fact worthy of debating)

I think I can unpack this and organize it or at least I will give it a shot. 1. Humans as a species are actually not inclined to enjoy failure, they are however inclined to be obsessive about learning from their failures and giving it another shot, but the 'failure'' part of that equation is not fun and that is objective reality of evolution and we are 'preprogrammed' that way for obvious reasons. If failure was intrinsically fun then people would pursue failure and obviously overtime 'evolutionary statistic' would delete humanity due to a lot of failures. 2. 'survial' games are intrinsically a 'demoted' version of winning (aka try not to lose and you win). 3. Regarding RPG I could write a long historical essay on that as well. However to put it simply, the objective is to go from level 1 to level a million, not stay at level 2 forever. 4. (added) I think the real reason some people like the early starting points in game where one is a simple person is because the gameplay loop is faster and nothing more than that. Take VS for example, the feedback loop for getting yourself to the cooper age has quicker feedback signals than when one works on steel which involves a huge amount of grinding. ----------------- Regarding a side topic of the popularity of 'survival games'. I have this short version of an essay: One might argue that the prevalent popularity of 'winning by not loosing' might be a reflection of a collective subconscious understanding of societies current trajectory OR an expression of a lost time when we lived closer to the physical world of nature (I tend to think the latter). Having said that, if it was the days of the space age in the late 50s early 60s I am sure if RPG style games existed then, games of extreme optimism of technology would be far more popular than it is today. I say all this just as a matter of reflection, not really an underlining point.

Play in Adventure mode first so you can get the basics down. oh and for me..I never play a game without watching some early game videos.

This is a feature I would like to see 'fixed'. By 'fixed' I mean to my liking. Because really love the lighting affects in this game for a dimly lit environment filled with candles and torchers instead of lanterns. That said I play on Explorer mode so its not a big deal, its just now and again my armor stands move because the bugs in my house move them by bumping into them.

I personally think Tyron was fairly clear about the plans. I do not see it as confusing or subjective at all really. The only one that is a bit subjective in my mind is the term 'RPG' other than that, its pretty crystal clear to me.

molds for most items. My playthroughs tend to last longer than 200 hours. So..molds (not for everything but most)

I will tell you what sold me. rhadamants videos where the first time I saw smithing and mechanical power in the game. That is when I started to look into it more seriously. It not being on Steam was an issue for me for sure. I was also originally put off by videos describing it as 'super hard core brutal and unforgiving'. After watching the smithing and mechanical power videos I started to look into the possibility of changing the settings away from any description where one might be inclined to use the word 'brutal' to describe it.

Here is what Tyron said in the within the first few sentences of the announcement I do not see any reason to assume it would be instantiated in way different that 'homo sapiens' is currently for example. I also do not see that there would be any reason that it would not be '...part of Vintage Story' given that is exactly what Tyron said explictly.

exactly. in fact your first sentence basically sums up what I have struggled to say for weeks now. spot on

Here is what Tyron said I do not have any reason to believe at this time that the 'mode' would not be any different from the game modes existing now as far as it relates to how to instantiate it.

actually I have been using Steam for more than 10 years now and I had no idea that you could add a non-steam game to your library. I would argue that 1. a person would have to know its possible. 2. would then have to learn how to do it. or...not bother and play any other of the 150,000+ games on steam

perhaps. Is there any talk of that? I would agree that is different from what I am talking about and what I am assuming is the plan. I assume the plan is you start up Vintage Story main menu (just like now). Then you start a new game and pick the new 'mode' We might have to go back to the original announcement to formulate a better assumption

I am struggling to understand what you wrote here but I think you are saying the same thing I am saying.

I think there is a opportunity cost here. They can work on either A. Steam power B. combat overhaul. Yes they can do both but it would take longer for both if done in parallel and it would delay one or the other if done in series. I want steam power

no...but with only a few exceptions I play games with combat off. I clocked in all my combat time for at least a decade more than 20 years ago.

I was unaware thanks for illustrating how common this approach is. I personally do not own any game that does this but I see now its common place, thanks all. Just to clarify though, I am talking about games in which you double click the icon for one game(using common explanation of how it works), to get into the other game. I do not know if those you have listed are that way or not but that is what I am refering to. so for example, double click on Space Engineers to get into Medieval Engineers.

I have heard of 'no Steam no buy' and I normally am exactly that person. Steam has a lifetime of great games, so in the interest of not having 10 different places to get my games I prefer to keep them in one portal. I do not think that is outlandish, I am glad I made an exception for VS but it did take me a year

I am not going to address everything you have said only because I have to do some other things and its not out of disrespect for the time you put into the reply I will keep this short and perhaps in summary If one wants to play Counter Strike, they do not double click on the Half Life 2 game to do that. That is the point I am making. Ironically this game specifically had the same path as Counter Strike, however, the Half Life team did not set out to intentionally create another game that will be instantiated by clicking on Half Life as an end goal. Now is VS plans to make this a mode until its a game and then spin it off? I do not know but I think you can see the difference