Grym7er

BUT, huuuge BUT: Slop (imo) can be either: 1. A product was made with AI (specifically, code, research, ideas, implementation specifics, etc, etc), OR 2. A product CONTAINS a lot of unnecessary AI. Code falls into category 1, art falls into category 2. I don't mind category 1 too much. Category 2 is much more apparent, and my tolerance for it is much lower (it becomes slop much faster, in my eyes), simply because, for me, it really does reduce the quality of the experience. Unnecessary AI functionality, generic AI art, that kind of thing. I don't mind AI art in and of itself, it is again a case of most AI art is simply just not good. Generic, bland, too busy, somewhat random.

Edit: Actually, I can explain it better: I agree, it is disingenuous to imply that they are the same thing. I don't think they are the same thing. I don't think a mod should be considered slop if machine translation was used. My view extends that notion to more than just translation, though, to some extent. For example, in most cases, I don't consider the mere use of AI in the making of a product to instantly classify it as slop. I will try out stuff that was made with AI, and if it works fine, and the author maintains it, I don't think it is slop. Unfortunately, that is very rarely the case, and most AI things end up as slop. Not all, but most. That is about as succinctly as I can put it.

Alright, I'll do what Rainbow Fresh did and just accept that I'm not going to get a reasonable conversation going here. Have a good one.

The concepts are similar, though no analogy is perfect. At the root, both are tools that make challenging tasks easier for and more accessible to an average person. We've just gotten extremely accustomed to being able to do fairly complicated maths on a device that everyone carries around in their pocket. A few years from now, it is fairly plausible that any John Doe with a phone will be able to quickly prompt an AI to build a tool to solve a very specific problem or challenge for them right then and there. and so you can quickly see how AI coding could become as standard in day to day life as a calculator. I'm not saying it will, because I'm of the opinion that the AI industry is built on matchsticks and will probably collapse. AI assisted coding isn't likely to disappear, though, it's too efficient not to use (again, not vibe coding).

Please do elaborate. How else will I learn?

I dunno, the logic seems flawed. "If you could do math, you would, you can't so you cheat (by using a calculator)" "If you could eat your food, you would, but you can't so you cheat (by using cutlery)" "If you could write, you would, but you can't so you cheat (by using a word processor)" "If you could code, you would, you can't so you cheat (by using StackOverflow in 2020)" These are all cases where it is entirely feasible and acceptable to do the things without the 'tools of cheating'. How is using AI to code any different? I will clarify: I am not talking about vibe coding at all, but using AI to write code if you understand the code and the problem. Coding is merely explaining to the computer how to solve a problem using a language that the computer understands. With AI, computers are starting to understand natural language explanations of how to solve a problem, so what's the difference?

I pretty much agree with you on all counts, except that I think this line has a bit more nuance to it. With the way AI is going, you do not need to be able to understand code to be able to fix bugs, up to a certain (and presently, fairly limited) point. Stuff like cursor does the actual debugging for you, if you are able to clearly and concisely explain what the bug is, when it happens, how to reproduce it and sometimes even (depending on how well you understand game design) what you think the issue could be, in many cases the AI can find and solve the bug. With these simple systems, debugging is often a case of understanding the problem, and not necessarily understanding how to fix it. But then again, that kind of understanding generally develops from understanding how these systems works at a lower level, so it's a bit of a catch 22. So I think vibe coding a simple mod is totally fine, achievable and maintainable (if you can foot the bill for vibecoding), but beyond that, rather learn how to do it yourself. For myself, I vibe coded a mod (but I do programming in my job), which kinda got me hooked, so now I'm learning it the right way : ) Thanks for the response.

Loads of people are going to be very, very, very triggered by this topic, but it's exactly those people's point-of-views that I'm trying to understand better. Let me first set the scene: You are browsing the ModDB, and you see a cool new mod. You open up the mod, but of course it's 2026 so you're immediately on the alert for whether or not it is AI. Edit: This is not about AI Art. There has already been a discussion about that, that went nowhere. So kindly go read that forum post if you want to say something about AI art in mods. Question: What constitutes "AI use" in mods, i.e what level of AI use is acceptable to you? A simple example: I google "vintage story json patching how to use addmerge". I read the AI summary and apply what I've learned there to my mod. I state as much in an AI Use Disclaimer on the mod page. Is this mod now AI slop? Another example: I clone the vsessentialsmod, vssurvivalmod and vsapi from github, and then use AI to ask questions about the codebase to understand how it was done in vanilla, then apply that knowledge to my own mod. Is this mod now AI slop? One more: I don't know C# syntax all that well, so I ask e.g Cursor "write me a for loop skeleton" and then use that for loop as a starting point for my own code. Is this mod now AI slop? The for loop in question, for those who don't know: for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) { Console.WriteLine(i); } Second to last one: If you answered no to any of the above, then at what point would you feel it is required of the author to use an AI Use Disclaimer in their mod's page? Last one: if the author has an AI usage disclaimer in their mod page, do you even bother to read it or does that immediately disqualify the mod as AI slop, even if the disclaimer says "I used AI to translate banane (german) to banana (english)"?

It's not exactly what you asked for, and you're already aware of this, but in case someone finds this and thinks "hey I should implement this", my mod does part of this already and is open-sourced if you want a place to start: https://mods.vintagestory.at/truearchimedesscrew

Hi there, I run a tiny private server on an AWS EC2 instance. Sometimes, and very often (recently), when I stand on a translocator, the sounds starts playing, the animation plays, and then it just continues, indefinitely. No black screen, no teleportation, nothing. I just stand there and wait, and nothing happens. Leaving the translocator and stepping back onto it doesn't work, restarting my game doesn't work, I have to restart the server to get translocator functionality back. The server is modded, but there's nothing (that I know of) that affects translocator functionality. Has anyone experienced this before?

Did you find a solution to this?

As I said, I haven't checked it out for myself and I'm not really planning to until 1.21 stable (I use the update notes to generate hype for the full release), but if it is purely a visual effect (like the wavy ocean sands), I don't really care. I'm somewhat aware of the complexities of implementing wave simulations efficiently for these types of games, but I got very excited by the thought of maybe, just maybe, enticing some of my friends away from Valheim so we can have the same sailing experiences in VS. But alas, if I interpret what you say correctly, it is merely a visual effect, but I'm sure that actual waves is on the "implement if technically possible" list. It would make more sense to release it as part of a more ocean-focused update, though. : )

You're contradicting yourself. If you take "added bears" to a game without bears as revolutionary, then: - 1.20 elk riding system is revolutionary - 1.20 ship building system is revolutionary - 1.21pre2 WIP ocean waves sounds revolutionary ( because I haven't checked it out for myself yet, but I am super excited about it) Updates don't need to be revolutionary. Excellence is not achieved from revolutionary drops. Look at No Mans Sky, look at Minecraft. Also, if you consider the 2016 version of Minecraft as a "complete" experience, then you should consider VS 1.20 as a "complete" experience as well, because it very much is, by your measurement of "complete". For Tyron, 'complete' seems to mean that he has added all features and functionality that he wants in the game. For you, 'complete' means that there is an end goal with a credits scene. The problem doesn't lie with Anego, the problem lies with your perception of what a complete game entails. If a end credits cutscene played when you defeated the Eidolon, would you be happy? Because that seems to be what you are implying. EDIT: For myself, I am just so glad to have 30 more years of content to look forward to. Infinite replayablility, pretty much the last game I will ever need. For me, VS is already a complete experience, and anything I want to change, I can just do myself.

Have you ever played modded Minecraft before?

VS Engine is readable open source, which means you can read and use the engine but you can't sell something that you make using it - that is illegal. Specifically: https://github.com/anegostudios/vsapi?tab=License-1-ov-file#:~:text=Proprietary software owned,your own mod.

@Tyron I love this game, even though I only got it recently, and I love the update frequency, quality, and volume (since I started playing, which was only around 1.20.3 or so). I love how the game is built for modding and readable open-source, and I am flirting with the idea of getting into making mods myself. I love the dedication to the vision for what you want VS to be, and the refusal to compromise on it, and I really appreciate the transparency with how Anego wants to do things. I also really like the update notes, for some reason. I get so excited whenever an update releases, but I don't even plan on playing 1.21 until the stable build is released (except maybe to check out the ocean waves). Vintage Story scratches an itch that Minecraft has failed to properly scratch for quite a long time now, and given how the development of VS seems to have been handled thus far, I have completed belief in the team's ability to make it pan out for the best. Some of the naysayers have valid concerns, most of the naysayers don't - even if Anego Studios shuts down tomorrow and VS development gets cancelled, I'd still consider my 20 Euros money well spent, and then I'd have the motivation to add the missing features myself. Keep being transparent, keep developing Vintage Story the way you envision. VS is already the game I always wanted to make myself, and so I'm happy to wait and eager to see how the Adventure Mode can complement and enhance what we have already.

Wait, what is the shift+H trick?

You need to place them inside the stone. The bomb damage radius is more or less centered on it, I think. If you place it completely inside stone, it destroys about 64 blocks (4x4x4 cube, minues the corners and one or two other blocks).