Endless play

[Gennadios]

Except for the Glitterworld and some of the academic/political origins, they all pretty much have a consistent level of suck. I can't think of a single reason most characters would want to go back to space.

One of the origins is even "Colony Settler."

+1 endless play.

[Kegereneku]

I found your remarks somewhat off-putting and narrow minded. I respect your gameplay preference to have a game with a finite start and ending and thus you should respect those of us who enjoy open ended gameplay where our imagination and storytelling are in the forefront.

You've wrote a great advocacy there, but with all respect I think you misunderstood the intent of my words and say things that sound obvious or simplistic for me as well, so let's try to not fall into personal attack. I respect open-world game and didn't feel the need to mention it, but you do not let popularity dictate what is "good" or how everything should be from now on.

In any case I didn't meant to strip the players of choices, although in video game restricting the choices of the user is exactly how you can create interaction & tense situation. I was just remarking (though provocatively ?) that for a Rimworld storyteller to match a players expectation it need "hook" to differentiate users playstyle.
Or said another way "I won't let you make my Rimworld slow, long and boring by default because you want to !"

My suggestion was meant to allow anyone to play through Cassandra before deciding to switch.
Basically I'm suggesting more Storyteller AI. (what I expect Tynan to do anyway beyond Alpha)
After all the description say : "Cassandra creates story events on a steadily-increasing curve of challenge and tension."
Phoebe Basebuilder do the same, but with longer slow time.
Since I do not see a steadily-increasing fit a game of indefinite length, you need another AI.
So the solution could be a storyteller that is keen on "looooong story that goes on forever"

The distinction (in my mind) would be that while Cassandra DO pressure you into choosing/reaching a end hook that do no end with the death of all your colonist and the annihilation of your base, this new storyteller would only try to keep you alert but let you enough time to increase your population or send (eg) several colony-ship of deadly cannibal cyborg in power-armor (to see in later saves).
Alternatively a conventional Endgame could propose you to switch to another Storytelling AI with no End (akin to my first proposal)

ALL THIS ASIDE, I believe game like Skyrim and it's "content" to be overrated. Though I'll cut some slack to Skyrim for having been disappointed by Oblivion. To be quick, I do not think highly of gigantic world when their procedural and automatic generation of "content" is so cheap, unoriginal and badly used it make my head hurt. There are games that are absurdly popular yet we can find legitimately bad.
I'll prefer 10metricless time a "corridor game" that captivate me for hours over a open-world sandbox that repeat itself after an hour and wasn't that good to begin with. (think : Dark Messiah vs Oblivion). Oh and I LOVE Minecraft by the way.

[akiceabear]

ALL THIS ASIDE, I believe game like Skyrim and it's "content" to be overrated. Though I'll cut some slack to Skyrim for having been disappointed by Oblivion. To be quick, I do not think highly of gigantic world when their procedural and automatic generation of "content" is so cheap, unoriginal and badly used it make my head hurt. There are games that are absurdly popular yet we can find legitimately bad.
I'll prefer 10metricless time a "corridor game" that captivate me for hours over a open-world sandbox that repeat itself after an hour and wasn't that good to begin with. (think : Dark Messiah vs Oblivion). Oh and I LOVE Minecraft by the way.

+1000 to all of your post, but especially this. I despise Skyrim and cringe at the thought of Rimworld trying to emulate it. Bloat does not equal quality or good story telling.

Wondering exactly how players define "endless play" that is different from a neutral storyteller (e.g. even slower Phoebe)?

[Vexare]

You've wrote a great advocacy there, but with all respect I think you misunderstood the intent of my words and say things that sound obvious or simplistic for me as well, so let's try to not fall into personal attack. I respect open-world game and didn't feel the need to mention it, but you do not let popularity dictate what is "good" or how everything should be from now on.

In any case I didn't meant to strip the players of choices, although in video game restricting the choices of the user is exactly how you can create interaction & tense situation. I was just remarking (though provocatively ?) that for a Rimworld storyteller to match a players expectation it need "hook" to differentiate users playstyle.
Or said another way "I won't let you make my Rimworld slow, long and boring by default because you want to !"

Well we're going to have to agree to disagree then because either way it's personal opinion and personal game preference. I think my solution is far more agreeable than yours. I am suggesting giving the players choice and option of how they want to play and Tynan's already on that path with the various storyteller options so it's obviously the direction he wants to go even if he has reservations about endless play / sandbox options.

In your way (read: opinion), the player should have only one way to play with a finite ending to add game tension and a proper goal. In my way, the player decides their own goals and roleplay stories by choosing to leave or choosing to stay and build a colony over a long period of time (many years). My opinion that you seemed narrow minded was certainly not a personal attack in any way, it was a response to your rigid opinion of how you believe the game should be played and nothing more.

I'm certainly not suggesting the game be fundamentally changed to a slower / non-interactive sandbox and your remark of "I won't let you make my Rimworld slow, long and boring by default because you want to !" is exaggerated and equally insulting /mocking to me honestly. Let's be clear here, I do *not* want a slow, long and boring game. I simply want the option to stay and build a real colony with a legacy over a longer period of time rather than just playing through the static take-off-in-ship-game-over ending that is currently what everyone is forced to participate in as currently designed.

Yes, you can stretch it out longer with Phoebe and a low difficulty setting but Tynan's admitted he didn't have it in mind to be an endless play option and that eventually the pressure to leave will always be there because of increasing waves of attacks. To me, that's limited and also "boring" as you put it. Who wants to sit there turtled up in a base while increasingly larger piles of pawns are thrown at you by the AI? Boring.

Perhaps using Skyrim as an example was a poor choice because yet again it's just shredded by your low opinion of sandbox games overall which isn't very fair. It's obvious that style of play is not your cup of tea. Ok, I get it. But it very much *is* a large majority of players cup of tea and many find the freedom to expand, explore, build and create stories of their own an attractive option. Saying "just because a lot of players love it doesn't mean it's a great game!" is also equally absurd. I find World of Warcraft to be an absolute mess of a game and an endless MMO treadmill grind but millions of players continue to shell out top dollar to play it month after month for TEN YEARS now so I have to begrudgingly say it's apparently a great game to a large percentage of gamers in the mainstream market. But we're not talking mainstream here. RimWorld is a niche game appealing to a smaller audience and a certain type of game-player. I was not comparing (and am not comparing now) this game to those only using them as examples of how a game can be very popular and fun for a large number of people and yet not be the kind of game you personally enjoy at all. I respect that for those games.

The numbers here don't lie. Players are voting for an endless play option. This is a small select population of fans who make the effort to register and post on the private forums, not the general public. Now this has nothing to do with whether or not Tynan is actually able or willing to make the game's AI perform that desire in a meaningful way that makes sense and doesn't detract from the interaction and content and vision he has for the game. If he has no desire to see the game go that direction then there again, I respect that. I'll stretch out my games as long as I possibly can and enjoy what's there. I'm not asking the game to change to my desires and force you or anyone else who does not want that playstyle in the game. I'm saying give me that option. You already have the option to play the game the way you like it, so why are you so adamantly against mine and trying to gloss over something I (and many others) would enjoy? I'll quip back with "Who are you to decide what's a 'good' game ending for me to play?"

PS: I think the more commonly compared Dwarf Fortress is a better example of a game that enjoys immense longevity and storytelling (ie pen and paper style RPG) and is what I see RimWorld aspiring to be. Players most certainly have no intentions of investing that many hours, days, months and years into one single community only to be told "ok you're going to get attacked to the point you have to pack up and leave" ... uh, what? The game would not be as popular with it's audience if it did not have such a rich, detailed legacy for players to create over long periods of time. And the interface wasn't meant for humans.

[Kegereneku]

Well we're going to have to agree to disagree then because either way it's personal opinion and personal game preference. I think my solution is far more agreeable than yours. [.........]

I'd be happy to agree to disagree, but you kind of invite me to clarify big misunderstanding.
1) What I suggested is anything but "rigid", please re-read ALL my post.
2) I do NOT have a low opinion of open-world & sandbox (not even overall), you blow out of proportion my first sentence on this thread (go to the bold part on that). The only opinion I gave was on Oblivion and said I loved Minecraft (just as I like other)

The "spaceship end" was but one example, I took for granted that everyone would envisage there could/would be several ending "hook" and none of those ending would be decided beforehand for us (neither deny us to keep playing). However, Cassandra and Phoebe (haven't tried Randy) are meant to increase pressure upon the players quite increasingly, which isn't compatible with a endless (or way above balanced) playtime. Not unless you change those AI but other players are quite satisfied with short game and ending.

Hence, what I discussed was a proposal to get to the very pro-choice solution you claim to want. Yet I could argue that you are the one limiting player choice to "pointless endless game"...if I exaggerated it.
Endless open-world, or so-called "more choice" logic don't necessarily make a game "superior" to another. Else innumerable story-driven game wouldn't still make history.
An open-world or sandbox is merely a mean to an end, and again not a "superior one" by any metric.

By the way, we should both refrain from using Tynan aspiration as arguments furthermore, it look childish in retrospect.
On the same vein, you should know polls like this one can be interpreted in many way and are never perfectly formulated. I'm not surprised a voting option get chosen more if it can be translated as "Do you want infinite fun ?" versus "Do you want to be lashed ?" with no mention on the way to do so or unexpected consequences.

In our case, anybody could chose "yes" because the phrasing do NOT exclude GAME THAT END as standard with "extended play" as something they still want enhanced, even if secondary.
As you seem to treat that as a "victory", I kindly advise you to check your interpretation.

Fortunately I believe you can still offer "endless players" what they want, since it's their problems when they'll ultimately get bored. The important point is that ENDING do not disappear from Rimworld, and Rimworld itself stay balanced for "shorter" play (say between 2 and 8 years depending of Storyteller)

The worse in all this ?
It's that considering your posts as a whole I think we have compatible aspiration. But I infer you didn't get the implying subtext in my first (slightly provocative) message :
I said "Sometime I see Endless Sandbox as a cancer..." with the hinted-at meaning that those are so "in" every game developer or player act as if procedurally-generated blandnesscontent and infinite boredomplaytime made anything better.

Rambling part :
Myself I like the idea of -thanks to Rimworld unique gameplay- being able to have years worths of  adventure and base building "as-if-I-micromanaged" condensed in a few IRL-hours, several times. And remembering with nostalgia how each game played differently (still have to see the Tales system in action).
Such thing wouldn't pack the same impression if I needed 50 IRL-hour to accomplish something that felt having no point in the end.

[Vexare]

I said my piece and feel confident I was intelligent and articulate. I'm satisfied with my stance and the overall opinions of others I've read who agree the game could use another optional way to play / end / not end. I think a lot of your 'provocative' responses as you call them are clearly antagonistic and passive aggressive such as saying it's 'childish' to refer to Tynan's aspirations...uh, what?

I don't really need to keep debating this topic with you because at this point there isn't really a point anymore that hasn't been beaten to death and I kind of started to get glazed eyes in your last response. Cheers.

[RemingtonRyder]

This one seems to have run its course.