Factorio News

Read this post on our website.



In the last few weeks, we've really accelerated our work on the campaign. We've been pushing ahead a lot with both the scripting and blocking out the physical level design.One of the problems we've come up against a lot, is that we often need to perform custom edits to the map, which are quite tedious, but not common enough to add a new tool to the map editor for them. For example, something like "disable all the spawners in this region".

This kind of problem is easily solved with a little bit of custom Lua code, but getting the specification of the area we want to edit into Lua is a painful process of noting down and typing out location coordinates. It is also easy to lose track of these Lua snippets, as there is no good place to save them.

To solve this problem, we decided to add a Lua snippet tool to the map editor. This tool will let you drag your cursor over an area, and it will then run your custom Lua code on that area. The snippets are named, and saved in your player-data.json, so you can keep them around for later.

https://cdn.factorio.com/assets/img/blog/fff-316-snippet.mp4
For example, this simple snippet replaces trees with biters.

Currently, there doesn't seem to be a very big scene for community made custom maps/scenarios with custom maps, and we're hoping that the example from the campaign once released, as well as the much improved editor we have in 0.17 will encourage more people to give this a go.


As some of you may have heard, Apple is introducing a new system called notarizing to their MacOS apps. This is a system where you sign you packages and upload them to apple so they can run something akin to a virus scan, and mark it as approved. As of the new MacOS Catalina version, this will be mandatory. Our friends at Valve were nice enough to send us a warning with some info about the process. Up until now, our MacOS binaries haven't even been signed at all, so this seemed like a good time to get on that. To be clear, you could, and can play unsigned factorio binaries on MacOS, but you need to change your security settings to do so (or so I thought).

To test, I grabbed the .app of 0.17.69, signed it, uploaded it to apples notarization server, and got the notarization process to succeed (eventually). I then copied it onto a completely fresh, default settings install of macOS Catalina, double clicked it, and it ran, with no security prompt. Problem solved, right? Well, after that I decided to do a sanity check, and copied over the completely unsigned binary of 0.17.68, and it ran just fine as well, also with no security prompt.

So, at this point, it seems like we don't really have a way to test this process, so all we can do is set things up correctly to the best of our abilities, and see if it works for people. The next Factorio release should include signed and notarised macOS binaries, so if anyone has problems with 0.17.70 security warning on macOS, please let us know.This whole process has been rather slow and painful (just getting the notarizing tool working was a bit of a saga in itself), and doesn't inspire much confidence in Apple's developer ecosystem, so if anyone at Apple is reading this, please, please, make this process better.

Also to make it known again, we are still looking for a macOS developer to join our team, so if you are interested or know someone who is, please checkout the job listing.


For a long time we have been improving the biter pathing, with many iterative changes and tweaks. However we have long had a problem in the moment where a group of biters encounters the players base. I am sure the scene below is familiar to all Factorio players:

https://cdn.factorio.com/assets/img/blog/fff-316-biters-collide.mp4

This mating dance or whatever it is, has long been a thorn in our side. The reason behind it is quite logical. When moving, the biters are in a group, and everything goes smoothly. However when they see an enemy, they are 'distracted' by it, and individually try to attack it. Since the biters are now moving and pathing as individuals, things start to get messy. The biters find a path, but then there is another biter in the way, so he tries to move and turn around, but there are biters in the way there too, and each of those biters are trying the same thing, so it all goes gets clogged up for a while.

The solution we have decided, which some might consider a 'hack' is that we simply don't make biters collide with other biters. In the engine this was a rather simple change, and was already possible just using normal mods. The result speaks for itself:

https://cdn.factorio.com/assets/img/blog/fff-316-biters-no-collide.mp4

There is already some 'separation' logic in the engine to keep biters from getting too close to each other, so in the end we get away with a lot of the benefit of no collisions, without the immediate/obvious problem of biters infinitely stacking. There might be some smaller issues to pop-up with this change, and maybe some balancing tweaks to be made, but we are happy with the outcome so far.


Next week I'll be in Poland for 3 events:

• I'll be visiting the consumer expo and indie areas of Poznan Game Arena (18-20th Oct).
• I'll be going to the talks and parties of Game Industry Conference (17-20th Oct).
• I'll be attending some workshops during Game Design Summit (16-18th Oct).

If you are in the area and see a guy with a Factorio hoodie, it will most probably be me. I am looking forward to meet any fellow developers or fans attending.


Over the weekend, two of us (wheybags + Abregado) entered the Ludum Dare game jam. A game jam is an event where people make a game as completely as can be in a fixed time-frame (in this case 48 hours). We ended up making a rather Factorio-appropriate gear puzzle game. Check it out if you're interested.



As always, let us know what you think on our forum.

Read this post on our website.


We recently bought and assembled some high-end PCs, with the hope to gauge the performance, speed up running tests, and potentially consolidate the number of servers we are maintaining internally. The two lucky CPUs were a i9-9980XE 18-core and a Ryzen 3900X 12-core.



We are using the time to complete our test suite in 'heavy mode' as a benchmark. Heavy mode basically saves and reloads the game each tick, and compares a CRC of the map from before and after. It is super slow to run, but the heavy test is critical to help find any possible determinism issues. There is some more info on 'heavy mode' in FFF-63.

As a baseline, the 'standard' CPU in the office for developers is the i9-7900x 10-core, which runs heavy tests in about 530 seconds. In real time this is 8 minutes and 50 seconds, a long time for a team member to sit around for results before they can push. We can do better!

As you would expect, the new 18-core was blazing fast, with a test time of about 400 seconds, shaving off over 2 minutes. However the Ryzen was a different story, with a test time of about 600 seconds. This goes against what we predicted, where more cores and higher frequency mean lower test times. The initial results from the 12-core Ryzen were worse than from the 10-core Intel; not a good start.

So I did some digging and some research, and the answer I arrived at was RAM. When we ordered the parts, not much thought was given to the selection of RAM, just some standard 16GB 2666MHz sticks to fill all the slots. Luckily, I looked on a local Czech website, and they had some stock of the brand new G.SKILL 3600MHz Trident RGB Neo, a high performance RAM stick made exactly to suit our new Ryzen CPU. After installing the new RAM, we had a test result that better matched our expectations: 450 seconds. We knew beforehand that Ryzen liked fast RAM, but we didn't realize how significant of a difference it could make.

So now we have set up both these new machines to run tests automatically after each commit, and we are very happy with the result. The new i9-9980XE can compile and run heavy tests faster than our old i7-4790K can compile and run just normal tests. Having it run automatically also frees up individual developers from the responsibility of running heavy tests locally, so they can just push as normal and continue working.


Alongside building the new servers, we also had some new storage shelves installed in the server room. So this week I spent some time moving the servers from their old home (of the floor) onto the new racks, and moving a lot of the 'PC junk' (cables, mice, fans, spidertron, keyboards, SSDs, headphones etc.) that had accumulated around the office into the server room.



We now have 10 servers, some run tests, some do the deployments, etc. We are hoping to reduce this number in the future, as we can have 1 beefy PC do the work that is currently handled by multiple older/slower ones.


This week I spotted a Reddit post by /u/Bladjomir. It is a video of this modded base after he had respawned all the biter bases. I was really in awe at just how different the game can 'feel' once you started adding and combining mods (especially when it is coupled with the classic Red Alert 2 soundtrack). So I messaged Bladjomir asking if I could include his video in this Friday facts, and he took the time to create a brand new video for us to showcase:

https://youtu.be/Qekvxw9t7zo

As someone who grew up playing the old school RTS games, these videos really hit on some nostalgia for me. What I am really proud of, on behalf of the team here, is just how well the game supports mods. It really is just so amazing to me that we have a engine now that can be extended and overhauled by mods and just works.

There will be a time when Factorio base game is finished, when we have made the game we set out to make. Yet even though our vision is complete, anybody can come along and implement their own ideas, rework what we have done, and even (theoretically) turn off the base mod and make essentially their own new game in the engine. So in the (super) long run, I believe that mod support will be critical to keep the game and community alive, and continuing to improve the modding capabilities of the game is a strong possibility for post 1.0 support/updates.

As always, let us know what you think on our forum.

Read this post on our website.

Hello,
technically this post is the Pi Friday Facts, but unfortunately we can't think of anything special to do... maybe someone can make a combinator cake... that can calculate Pi?


We released 0.17.69 as stable this Tuesday. It seems it all went very smoothly, no avalanche of crashes, and only a handful of technical support emails about updating video drivers.



Apart from stable, essentially no development work has happened this week; nearly everyone is on vacation (I am even writing this as I sit in the airport waiting to fly to London for a wedding). We're hoping that at the start of next week, with all the relaxation over, and the pressure of stable off our shoulders, we will get cracking on the next updates with renewed energy.

In fact I might be a little optimistic in saying this, but I think we are in for some exciting times here in the team. Before now, we have always done a cycle of having the whole team on development for a few months, then the whole team bug fixing for a few months. This binary approach is what gives us the traditional 'stable' and 'experimental' labels. This is not to say that all bug-fixing would stop once stable it out, quite the contrary, but this has been the general strategy.

What we are planning, if the logistics of it turn out okay, is to have significantly smaller feature releases, containing only a handful of new features. This is to have a sort of mixed cycle, and a mixed cycle in two similar ways:

• Some developers will be on bug-fixing while others are on development.
• The individual weekly/monthly work of a developer will have a more balanced mix of development and bug-fixing.

For example, while one developer works on a feature for the next feature release, another will be bug-fixing the features in the current release. This is only practically possible if the feature release frequency is relatively high.

This new structure has been a long time brewing in our minds, and we think now is the right time to try it out. With the GUIs we really need to do quick iterations and receive fast feedback to the changes. The traditional release flow meant that we could add a new feature to the game, and players wouldn't get their hands on it for months. Then once it is released and we start getting feedback on it, extra time is spent just re-orienting ourselves to the code and how it was written. If the feedback is given expediently, the rework and improvement is much more efficient.

Furthermore, I think it is more psychologically effective to work on a mix of bug-fixing and development. This is just theory now, but grounded in some observations I have made over time.

Development work, a new feature, new GUI, etc. is generally a long-form creative process. New systems have to be created out of pure thought-matter, ideas for implementation have to be evaluated and determined, and it also involves a lot of 'background processing'. Feature development always has more room for extension, and it is very hard to say 'It is finished'. It is also quite a subjective result, so sometimes it is hard to know if you 'did a good job'.

Bug-fixing on the other hand is very short form and challenge oriented. It is like investigating a murder mystery, and really feels like a complete story. Tracking down a problem inside the game engine engages a logical part of your brain, trying to piece together and backtrace where the fault is occurring. Generally the bug has a very clear 'win-condition', and you can close the game and let your mind rest peacefully. The result of a bug-fix is grounded strictly in objective measurements, so you can be reasonably sure if you 'did a good job'.

So these two parts of the job are in a way, quite distinct and separate: Development is a long-form creative process; Bug-fixing is a short-term logical process. From all this, my reasoning is that focusing on only one for a long period of time leads to quicker mental fatigue, and that a balanced workload will keep us happier and more productive.
In essence, doing development lets our bug-fix circuits rest, and doing bugs lets our development battery recharge.

There are also some pragmatic reasons I think the smaller/quicker releases will make things move along more smoothly:

• Bug-fixes after stable will be released within a short time-frame.
• The flow of bugs coming in will be less extreme, no more massive waves with each major release.
• There will be less 'blocking', where unfinished features delay a release. They will just be scheduled for a different release.
• Feedback will be more focused, so it is easier for us to evaluate.

At the start of the year, I read a book called "Rolling Rocks Downhill" by Clarke Ching. It is a book about software project management, it was quite an enjoyable read, and gave me a lot of inspiration to try and optimize our development effort. At that time we were just wrapping up 0.17, so there wasn't a whole lot of room to make changes to the way we do things. Now that we have stabilized 0.17, and with it, completed the 'traditional' cycle, there is opportunity for a fresh approach. I guess I will give the book another read next week...


As you might know, I've spent quite a considerable amount of time playing World of Warcraft classic the past few weeks. I find it very interesting that many people (me included) find this version of the game way better than the modern version, there are many reasons for it that I see (and some that I don't), yet it deserves some small analysis as it is always better to learn from mistakes of others. By that I mean, that I wouldn't want to spend next 10 years working on better versions of Factorio just to find out, that the old ones were better for some reason.

The topic that connects it all is "Making things more convenient isn't always making things better". There are a lot of activities in life and games that we would like to remove or make more convenient, but we don't really see the hidden benefits of it. Something like making an elevator to save time and effort, and feeling bad for moving less in the long run.

One of the things in wow is nicely illustrated by in this video. When people had to gather group for a dungeon back in the days (and now in classic), they had to do it manually. They had to spam LFG (*Looking for group) channels, ask in guilds or find long-time buddies to play with. In modern wow, they made a dungeon finder that allows you to just select a role and automatically teleport you to a dungeon with the appropriate people. It seems like a great convenience. But in fact, it removes so much that it is considered to be one of the most hated feature by many people.

• When it is harder to find a group, it has also more value when the group is already assembled. This means, that people are more likely to try to overcome problems while fighting rather then just quitting and re-rolling with someone else. This make it much more interesting as it created a lot of challenges where non-optimal setup or a noob in a group forced people to learn from each other more, or just to try to overcome the problems in a creative ways.
• When you are not teleported to the dungeon and have to actually travel there, it keeps the immersion of the game, the world is there to be explored, not just an arcade where you push and play. And same as with previous point, getting there requires more effort, so the value of doing the dungeon is higher.
• And generally, having more dungeon runs in the same time doesn't make it feel like you accomplished more in the game, as it generally just lowers the value of one run. And all this for the cost of it all being way more mechanical.

Another big example is level scaling. The idea is again nice, to make it more convenient. With level scaling, monsters conveniently scale to your level in the zone where you are, so you can quest at any place without having to avoid too high or low levels areas relative to your level.. But I consider this to be actually plague of any game where it appears. Instead of zones, their levels and your level meaning something, and the progress being clearly visible every level, suddenly it all disappears. The world isn't a place to explore, but rather arcade-like place that all resolves around you. Your level doesn't mean much, as it being too low isn't a problem anymore. The moments of having to run from areas where you are too weak to get back later are one of the most important in RPGs, and suddenly they are gone. The progress you see in games is like looking from a window of a train, if the train moved and the landscape moved the same way, you wouldn't feel like you are moving at all.

There are much more lessons learned while playing the game. Not only the mistakes made in modern version, but also lessens of good game design obviously. How could these be related to Factorio? I believe that on the deeper level, there could be a lot of parallels.

• Getting first mount at level 40 for 100 gold? You have to walk a lot before you get it and it might feel annoying at times. But when you actually get it, it means A LOT. Similar as how it is a game-changer to get construction robots/logistic robots/power armor. Getting there isn't easy, and there are certainly a lot of moments where you/we feel like having these sooner might be more convenient. But it would just decrease how great and valuable upgrade it is.
• We were thinking about a belt building tool, similar to the rail building tool. It would just connects ends, and even find underground connections etc to get to the point of destination. It would be super convenient. But suddenly, solving the belt puzzle wouldn't mean much, and having the belt factory would feel like much smaller accomplishment.

Anyway, thanks to all of you for such a great year so far, thanks to all our friends on the forum and throughout the community who have helped us in the great bug war of 0.17, and as always, let us know what you think on our forum.

Read this post on our website.


It has been 6 months and nearly 70 releases since we first launched 0.17 to the world. Now is the time to let is be enjoyed by all the players of the game. We are going to be continuing our work on 0.17 over the next few months, with small experimental releases of new features, and finishing all the GUI reworks.


The new map editor can be accessed directly in-game with the /editor command. Packed with new features and improvements, such as cloning tools, multiple surface support, and time control. The new editor also allows collaborative map editing in multiplayer. More details: FFF-252.


The enemies in the game, the native inhabitants of the planet, have received a major facelift in this update. As well as a graphical overhaul, the attacks and balancing of the spitters and worms has been revised, incorporating skill-based elements and some tactical decision making. More details: FFF-268, FFF-279.


Now when trying to join your favorite server, you can directly sync your mods with the server from in-game, and automatically join once they are all installed. This massively reduces the friction for joining modded servers. The in-game mod browser has also been redone to help find new mods and manage your installations.


We have massively optimised (and parallelized) the fluid update in 0.17. In effect each section of pipe can be updated independently of other pipe sections. This comes as welcome news for any megabase planners out there. Furthermore we have limited each pipe section to only a single fluid, and will actively block any placement that could mix fluids, to prevent the catastrophe of mixing water into your oil system and bricking the whole system. More details: FFF-271.


This release has a completely new rendering backend, written almost from scratch to our exact requirements. The new engine takes advantage of more modern GPU features and is highly optimized. What this means is that the game can now work with much less VRAM and allow players with older videos cards to still enjoy the game in high resolution at 60 FPS. More details: FFF-251, FFF-264, FFF-281.

Due to the more modern architecture, some issues may be present with certain hardware configurations, please see this forum thread if you experience any graphical problems.


We have added a completely new introduction scenario on a hand crafted map. It gives new players some simple goals and provides a place for them to experiment with a smaller toolset than Freeplay allows. The scenario is open ended, so that players may experiment with larger bases. A separate techtree is provided for this purpose which includes some infinite research. Our companion robot, Compilatron, is also present to help guide the player. More details: FFF-262, FFF-306.


We have added some powerful shortcut keys, which use the intuitive layout we are all used to. Now you can undo your last action by pressing CTRL + Z, quick equip a cut tool with CTRL + X, do quick copy/paste actions with CTRL + C/CTRL + V, and assign robots to upgrade your factory with the new Upgrade planner. More details: FFF-255.


We added a new GUI skin, along with the first batch of GUI reworks. The new GUI aims to unify the look and feel of the game, and provide a consistent visual basis for the players interactions with the world. More details: FFF-243.


As always there are a ton of smaller features and changes to discover in this latest major update. You can read the changelog in game for a full rundown, or checkout the release notes here.

We have our plan moving forward for the next version of the game, which you can check out here.

Read this post on our website.

Hello,
We have had quite a peaceful week here in the office.

Last night we went out for a burger and a beer as a last meal with Ernestas before he flys back home for another few months. It was also quite nostalgic, as we went to a place that we used to go to frequently near our old office, and the staff still remembered us.


It seems our 'news' of some programmers taking a break made headlines this last week: Work slows on Factorio while a dev “levels his priest” in WoW Classic.
Even though he is still not level 60, Kovarex found some time to fix a few more bugs, which seemed to go very smoothly, as he is feeling super recharged.

We also had Boskid come to visit the office, and he helped us do some intensive testing and test writing. Working together with Dominik, the two managed to find and fix a lot of bugs related to the fluid mixing system. It was certainly more efficient having someone doing QA inside of the office, so it seems our team might be getting a bit bigger.

With the last 'blocking bugs' resolved, the bug war is almost at a close. The count on the forum is down to only 16, and the automatic crash reports are looking okay:



We have released version 0.17.69, we are optimistic that this version may be able to be called stable. While this is almost over 1 month after our first 'stable candidate', we are confident now that this version is more stable than 0.16.


In last week's FFF we presented the new landfill terrain. We felt relieved by having another task done in GFX.
One of the first reactions in our forums was the idea by eradicator of rotating the grid to 45°. It followed a fast mockup made by ThreePounds. The idea was good, and apart from us, some people on the forums agreed.

The modification of our sources to get this rotation done was very affordable to us, so we decided to make it official and here we are now presenting it:



This solution is nicer than the 90°'s one because basically it doesn't interfere with the tile grid of the game, and provides a nice loose space feeling in the general composition. I just felt a bit guilty for not coming with the best approach from the beginning, but luckily our community is very keen to give us feedback on any aspect of the game.

Thanks guys for the feedback.

As always, let us know what you think on our forum.