devtrackers.gg
I had no idea!
I had no idea!
The way I look at these things is the return of investment of modules.
Since the actual production is the amount of beacons (lets call it B) multiplied by the amount of assamblers (lets call it A)
A) For cases with a lots of beacons for a little of assamblers, you have basically two assamblers per 1 beacon, so 3 buildings gives 8 output, so the ratio is 8/3.
B) For cases of rows of assamblers and beacons, each assambler is affected by 8 beacons, and each beacon affects 8 assamblers, on avarage 2 buildings (beacon + assambler), gives you production of 8, so the ratio is 8/2.
In conclusion 8/2 is bigger than 8/3, so the rows are generally better.
I’m fully aware inflation exists, it’s a fairly basic concept.
I don’t believe however retroactively applying inflation to the price of your released and finished product is the real reason you hiked the cost up.
So it is just about you not believing, and I probably can't do much about it.
Just note, that inflation is kind of a bigger deal here in Czech, as it is around double of what the dollar has, and we are just used to think about it and consider it more. I don't find it reasonable for the rate of inflation to be dictating the rate of products getting cheaper.
Also, it is not a finished product, Factorio is developed full time by the whole team, and there are quite a lot of things already fully implemented that will improve the game for everyone, not just buyers of the expansion (features), we just don't write the FFF at these days (although, several are already written, and just waiting for the right time).
The reason we don't write FFF is not that we wouldn't have what to show, we just don't want to tease people with so many cool things too long before the actual release, so there is a good intention again. I would guess, that you will choose to not believe again, but ...
I've never seen a fully released game retroactively increase its price because of "inflation". CoD 4 should be selling for $97 now.
I've also never seen such a tone deaf reply from a developer except maybe Blizzard.
As you write inflation in quotes, I would like to ask. Are you inflation denier, and you think it doesn't exist or something?
This aged well!
It did, I like to see how consistent we are. Thanks!
Read moreThere's a core problem with software projects in that adding more manpower tends to result in a "combinatorial explosion" of complexity. The software dev way to say it is that project complexity tends to scale exponentially in the size of the team.
So just using fewer devs seems like a good solution - and it can be, in certain circumstances. Factorio certainly wouldn't have been made a better game if they'd hired an extra hundred people.
However, number of people still tends to be the limiting factor in terms of content. In order to make more content (graphics, story, levels, mechanics, etc) you kind of do need more people. Factorio is helped by being somewhat limited in content - I just mean the quantity, not how good it is or how many hours the average player gets out of it.
So if you want games like Elden Ring, GTA, Fallout, etc etc, you need to eat the cost in extra complexity because you need a big enough team to make the insane amount of content that a...
The core of the problem is, that for some unknown reason, the bigger companies don't try to apply Test Driven development. Which is really weird, because this approach is even more useful with more people working on the project, as answering "will I break something by this change" is often basically impossible to answer in a bigger team when working without tests.
Open source teams are much more often using proper development practicies, that is why it probably isn't a problem in those situations.
Yeah, this some deeply disturbing dystopian shit.
As it should be :)
Hello, I have a question, why do you keep unconfirmed tips and tricks in the left bottom corner? I guess that the window of the "New tips" is there for a long time already, isn't it in your way? Aren't you curious what interesting infromation can be obtained by clicking tips and checking it out?
What I really want to know is: Did you guys invent that 'offer', or was it a real email that you received?
Real offer, one of many.
I was expecting a Factorio versión like https://youtu.be/BeBdRETZ5fQ
That would be kind of cool :)
Well, I have 30 bucks with your name on them.
It will be only the second time I buy a new game without looking at any reviews.
I live in Japan, and playing Factorio with my cousin is a major way for me to stay connected to my family in Germany.
Edit: Wow, interesting time stamp on that post. Around 5am. I'm curious: are you an early riser or a night owl?
One of these days when I just fall asleep together with the kids at 8pm ... :)
The fact you're using the term "expansion" and not "DLC" in 2022 warms my heart. There is no other developer in the industry I hold in as high regard as I hold Wube. I trust your work, dedication and more importantly your word, because you've cemented it's value with your actions ever since I heard about you, and that was way over 5 years ago. The latest years have been a letdown for gaming industry in general, amidst half-assed games, workplace harassments, and the sense that games in general became a service for investors to exploit rather than for creators to work on something that players enjoy. You're one of the little fish that's been swimming against this trend, and I just wanted to say thank you.
Thank you.
Thanks, this is appriciated. Big part of it is, that our (or at least mine) approach to money is, that once you have enough to live comfortably, and enough to financially support the ongoing (and future) projects you want to do, you don't really need more. There is no reason to squeeze the extra $ just to get yacht bigger then the next millionare, or to buy the overprised expensive stuff when you buy it just to show off. And this has some deep implications, because once you feel that you have enough, you can safely ignore all these people trying to buy % of your company for big cash. I actually reply to these kind of offers with the sentence "Thanks, but I have no use for the extra money". This feels very different to the culture I sense to be prevelant, where big amount of startups is created with the goal of "big exit" in mind.
So the implication of my approach is that we have no investors and shareholders pressuring us into the "service for investors to exploit", which w...
Read moreI imagine we will get further updates as they progress further into the steps, but I'd guess that the amount of additional information as for what the actual content is will continue to be limited as per their FFF 365 explanation as to why FFF was being put on hold for a while (to prevent people from getting hopes up for features that end up getting scrapped, also to prevent people from trying to features with mods, causing people to get disappointed when the actual functionality ends up being different than the mod author presented it) I don't think we will get weekly FFF until it is in the final phases of beta, where they've kinda already announced everything, and they are just adding the finishing touches before shipping it.
It is actually planned to have much more specific and deeper FFFs about most of the subjects, that will be published as the release date gets close enough.
They explicitly state "the expansion will not be 'just' a mod" meaning that what they accomplish in the expansion will be impossible if not incredibly difficult/inefficient to implement purely using the modding api.
I was almost certain of this from the initial announcement (edit: i've gone back to look at FFF 365 and they also explicitly state there that some of the new functionality is going to require engine changes), because it was almost certainly going to be something that wasn't just going to be a free addition, and if the additions were capable of being done through the modding api there wouldn't really be that much incentive to buy the expansion vs just adding the "mod version" of it. Though, I have no doubt that there will be some that do try to back port some or all of the expansion as a mod, but in all honesty, I think that many of us here are certainly more than happy to throw another $30+ dollars Wube's way for an expansion regardless of how good any back por...
Well, yea some of the mechanics could be implemented by mods easily, some in a non-user friendly way, but some of them .. I highly doubt it.
We really try to not get affected by this mod situation too much. If we want to do something good, we don't really care if there is a mod that is already doing the same thing, as it is still a different situation when you have the content with official graphics, UI, and in one balanced package.
Hell Ill i bet they even treat the janitors well.
Our cleaning lady gets yearly bonus.
StarCraft, etc did that IIRC
Starcraft II was specifically the example I used when this was discussed. And needless to say, I was quite happy to pay for the expansions considering what they contained as it turned out to be on eof the most enjoyable single player campaigns I know.
The most insane thing is that devs revamped entire tutorial system after 1.0 release, allowing it to run the game inside the tutorial window instead of using prerecorded gifs. This commitment, I think, is unprecedented, for a game that was already released, and doesn't have any monetization besides the initial price.
I'm glad this is appriciated. The system as byproduct allowed us to make the menu simulations quite easily, which I really like.And, it also saves our time, as these simulations are automatically working with the up to date graphics & behaviour, unlike the pictures in tutorials we were using, that had to be udpate over and over.
It's interesting how commonly repeated there is a misconception about belt compression and UPS effects. People saw the problem of handling gap-closure and perceived that as scaling with the number of gaps, rather than also being O(1) for a given belt even with the complexity of handling item removal and insertion.
Were the gaps themselves ever a factor affecting performance (edit: as in O(N) for the number of gaps, not just the length of the belt) in one of the earlier optimization passes of belt simulation?
The belt gaps affect the memory footprint of the belt contnets definition, but they only affect the performance when the belt is being compressed, but still, it always affects the last gap only, which can be accessed by O(1) again.
They have a really clever solve for the issue of moving things on belts; as I understand it, they group everything on each section of belt with no splits or merges, keeping track of what is at each end. This means to move the entire belt they only have to take stuff off and put anything on each end, rather than update every item on the belt. Super cool!
Exactly, so belt update is basically O(1) regardless the length of the section. And don't forget that belt logic is fully multithreaded.
It's not a bug, it's a spider.
Yea ... I think it is ok to leave it as it is :)
Edit: When I was developing the queue + follow features, I made a huge infinitely moving circle of spiders, I certainly recommend trying it.