Talk:RimWorld

http://rimworldgame.com/ (official) says "RimWorld is developed by Tynan Sylvester and Ludeon Studios, and we've been improving it since its first public release on November 4, 2013."

So I'm changing the early-access release date of Jan 2014, which has no citation, to the one stated on the official site. Also im not calling it "early-access" since that probably relates to some special status on some distribution platform. (eg. steam). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Logixdk (talk • contribs) 00:35, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Storytellers are moddable, Modding section missing
I'd like to see "There are three AI storytellers" changed to "The game ships with three preconfigured AI storytellers", and the section to conclude by stating that modders can create their own storytellers from scratch or as variations of existing ones and that Ludeon explicitly encourages players to do so. It should also be mentioned that storytellers work on complex sets of interlocking rules and timers using randomness to keep the game interesting/unpredictable while reining in randomness to keep the game fair, at least at the beginning.

There should be a whole paragraph on moddability and modding in the article since mods are a very important part of the game. The developer has been known to go to great lengths to make anything and everything moddable, he has incorporated well-written mods into the base game which is seen as praise and privilege for the modder by the game's modding community. A link to the forum's modding section might fit here nicely.

I'm not going to edit the article itself, yet I'd love to see an editor do so. (Olfan Kerels, no Wiki account, 130.180.13.90 (talk) 11:31, 27 July 2016 (UTC))

Outdated and missing sections
Coming across this page, I've noticed that it is missing quite lot of information; it fails to mention the moddability of the game, nor does it give a defintion for "ai story tellers". It also fails to mention additional content to the game that has been added since 2015, such as the ability to create further in-depth scenarios to play out. Also, wouldn't it also come under Genre of science-fiction? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AWearerOfScarves (talk • contribs) 09:54, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Actually, I rescind my last point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AWearerOfScarves (talk • contribs) 10:00, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Removal of "Plot" section
Looking through this page I see no reason to include a plot section for it, as the game itself does not contain any plot. I would suggest to rewrite it as a part of the Gameplay section instead, which better reflects what the game is about. — Comment added by 46.127.26.206 (talk) 19:10, 31 December 2017‎ (UTC+1)


 * Almost everywhere the article uses the world "plot", it then describes the milieu of the world, but not the actual events. I'd suggest renaming "Plot" to "Setting", and moving about half the text from there to "Gameplay". -- Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 18:37, 31 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I still think that it should be included in the Gameplay section. I can only think of two important setting points; that a ship has crash-landed into a planet in the other edges of the galaxy, and that it is set in the far future, where faster than light travel is not possible. — Comment added by 46.127.26.206 (talk) 20:17, 31 December 2017‎ (UTC+1)

Internal links
I feel that the internal links of the page should be directly linked to RimWorld´s own wiki database, if the object is directly shown in the game(i.e. solar panels, fueled stove, geothermal power plant, et cetera) as perhaps people might get a misconception. --SaveTheWild (talk) 22:51, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia doesn't link to external sites like that. See WP:EL. — HELL KNOWZ   ▎TALK 22:53, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Too many commas

 * The game is set in a universe where faster-than-light travel and superluminal communication are, so far, impossible, making large galactic empires inherently unfeasible.
 * With its release on Steam the game came with the addition, among other things, of a scenario editor, allowing users to choose and modify different starting plots, with different numbers of characters, starting items and map effects available; however, the location of these plots still remained the same, that is, still on a "rim world".[6]
 * With its release on Steam the game came with the addition, among other things, of a scenario editor, allowing users to choose and modify different starting plots, with different numbers of characters, starting items and map effects available; however, the location of these plots still remained the same, that is, still on a "rim world".[6]

Narrated by William Shatner

I would edit it but everything I touch is reverted by Wikipedia nazis

“Generally favourable”
This language implies a degree of negative reception to the game.

The game has received positive reviews from official outlets like rock paper shotgun, IGN etc.

It also holds a overwhelmingly positive rating on Steam, and GoG.

Perhaps the language could be shifted to “overwhelmingly positive”? 31.52.42.234 (talk) 15:01, 16 January 2022 (UTC)


 * We just go by what Metacritic says. Below the score of 87/100 they say "generally favorable." We can't change this wording without it becoming editorialization. The only way we as the writers of Wikipedia can even say something like "generally favorable" is because we're directly quoting the source itself (Metacritic). Changing it to "overwhelmingly positive" would not be adhering to a neutral point of view.--Megaman en m (talk) 19:58, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Does anyone have a link to a statement from the government?
Sorry if this is inappropriate for this section, this is the first time i've done something like this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Businessmer (talk • contribs) 20:44, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

Hey mate, they have since taken the page down, so it may be in review, who knows, but an archive of it is available here: https://web.archive.org/web/20220301142915/https://www.classification.gov.au/titles/rimworld Cheers, Sophlake (talk) 13:05, 6 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Seems to me like they're trying to Nonperson the game so as to not attract the Streisand effect so that they don't have to repeat what they did with We Happy Few due to the backlash against that game and release it uncensored. At least that's my theory. Note that I said theory and not hypothesis. Comments on the Rimworld subreddit support this, though in reality it's just me and CiXwOw complaining (I don't have a Reddit account yet though so don't quote me on that.) Wiimeiser (talk) 02:00, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
 * If you take a look at a search for Disco Elysium, https://www.classification.gov.au/search/title?search=DISCO+ELYSIUM+-+THE+FINAL+CUT&field_rating%5B1%5D=1&sort_by=search_api_relevance both the R and RC ratings are clearly visible and accessible. There's no doubt that this isn't due to it being in review, they want to bury the game's existence entirely. I mean, they already ignored me. Wiimeiser (talk) 14:18, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

"Fictional alien species"
The List of fictional alien species contains several RimWorld entries (or its sublists B, M and T do): Boomalopes, Boomrats, Muffalos, Thrumbos. But isn't it correct that the RimWorld lore does not know any aliens and instead all animals there are either from Earth or genetically engineered by humans? The fiction primer says "Mankind never discovered any truly alien lifeforms. However, given the ways we’ve changed ourselves, and created new forms of biological and technological intelligence, the universe is full of beings as alien as anything ever imagined." The in-game faction description of the insectoids kind of contradicts this ("Originally from the planet Sorne..."), but then again the descriptions of the individual insectoid species all call them "genetically-engineered" or "bioengineered", and either way, none of the mentioned animals is such an insectoid. Do you agree the Boomrats & Co should be removed from that list, or is them being strange animals living on outer space planets enough to qualify them as alien species? Karotte Zwo (talk) 16:35, 10 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I now removed those four RimWorld entries from the List of fictional alien species sublists. --Karotte Zwo (talk) 14:40, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 * So long as we have no WP:RS calling them aliens I think the removal is fine. Blue Edits (talk) 09:41, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Timeframe of Tynan Sylvester's Unreal Tournament levels
While researching this article, I found 2 sources that made competing claims about when Tynan Sylvester had his first experience with game design (by making custom Unreal Tournament levels). When I emailed him about it, our exchange went as follows:

"Hello Tynan, Rimworld fan and Wikipedia editor here.

A few days ago I was writing a short, one-paragraph biography about you in the "Development" section of Wikipedia's Rimworld article. However, while researching I found a contradiction: in your book "Designing Games" you have an "About the author" section where you write that you began with game design in 2000. However, in https://ludeon.com/press/ it is written that your first experience with game design was at age 15, making levels for Unreal Tournament. If you were born in 1986, you would be aged 15 in 2001-2002 - which would be later than what your book claims. Can you shed some light on this?"

"It's hard to remember that far back and I never sat down to figure out the timing tbh. In fact you're the first one to really ask this! So let me go back and see what we know...

I started on Unreal Tournament levels; this was my first digital game design work (I created a card game before age 10 but I'm ignoring that). I got UT around release which was Nov 22 1999. The oldest map I have a direct record of is SW-DrugBust (for the mod SWAT, which was later renamed to Tactical Ops) which was modified on Sept 22, 2000; I was 14 at that time. However, I know I made lots of maps before before I joined the SWAT mod team, so it's pretty likely I started at age 13 near the start of the 2000 or the end of 1999.

Hope that helps! Ty"

Based on this, I think it's best to ignore ludeon.com's claim and keep the article as is with the "2000" date. I'm not entirely sure if this guideline allows me to do this or not, but if it doesn't I still think it would fall under WP:IAR. Koopinator (talk) 12:49, 10 April 2024 (UTC)