[HN Gopher] The Farmer Was Replaced [video]
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The Farmer Was Replaced [video]
        
       Author : surprisetalk
       Score  : 93 points
       Date   : 2025-10-22 20:23 UTC (13 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.youtube.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.youtube.com)
        
       | skeltoac wrote:
       | I played this! The quadcopter with the straw hat got me. Funny
       | and great fun. At the end I was still full of ideas for
       | optimizing my code and the dev was making breaking changes that
       | would require a full rewrite (a good time guaranteed) but I was
       | more compelled to go back to Factorio due to the Space Age
       | expansion. The rest of this comment would be about Factorio but
       | writing on HN does not help the factory to grow.
        
         | candiddevmike wrote:
         | As someone with hours of time in Factorio pre-space age update,
         | I've really struggled to get back into the game. I really want
         | to build out a mega base with the new train logic, but every
         | time I try to get into it it just feels like work. Space age
         | seems like it had a pretty lukewarm reception, and some of the
         | tech tree changes seem like artificial padding (cliff
         | explosives).
        
           | mixel wrote:
           | Yeah, the cliff explosives being gated behind vulcanus sucks
           | a bit but they made the cliffs a lot more bearable in 2.0 I
           | think for a megabase run its a matter of how fast you can
           | reach legendary and process everything in it and once you got
           | that you can go really into megabasing this game. Sadly they
           | nerfed trains so hard by introducing Quality since everything
           | got better but trains stayed the same which is a shame
        
             | ACCount37 wrote:
             | Trains still got buffed by overhead rails. Those enable
             | very compact designs, allow for easier hookups and reduce
             | the usual intersection/signals pain by a lot.
             | 
             | I agree that no quality or endgame upgrades for trains is
             | an odd choice, but I guess that's what the mods are for.
        
           | jpalawaga wrote:
           | For me factorio is a one playthrough kinda thing. I don't get
           | off on endless optimization and making it bigger for the sake
           | of bigger, feels like work.
           | 
           | That said, I was more than happy to build the base back from
           | scratch in space age, and I find the expansion to be every
           | bit as fun as the base game. So I endorse it. Especially as
           | you already know how to do some things quicker.
        
           | nness wrote:
           | That was my first impression when I picked it up -- the game
           | strongly suggests you start from the start, and re-loading a
           | pre-Space Age save will result in many things breaking. I
           | gave in and started over, worried I'd need to spend dozens of
           | hours just building up to where I was before.
           | 
           | But this wasn't the case -- Space Age isn't only new content,
           | but a complete re-balance of the original game. It is far far
           | less grindy and requires much less baby-sitting of
           | production.
           | 
           | Your first space platform, the ships, and the planets, are
           | best thought of as unique Factorio-inspired puzzles. Each
           | planet is like a Factorio game-mode to solve, with its own
           | restrictions to design around.
           | 
           | I think those who have hundreds of hours in the base-game
           | have to un-learn of the base game to pick up the DLC. Many of
           | the complaints are pointed at the tech tree changes -- they
           | wanted an expansion on what was there, not a recreation. But
           | for me now, I wouldn't recommend Factorio without Space Age.
        
           | bigstrat2003 wrote:
           | I'll be honest, I don't think Space Age was all that good as
           | an expansion. The developers really focused on giving the
           | player new types of logistics challenges to solve, but that
           | was never what I wanted. I wanted the same Factorio gameplay,
           | but with more stuff to build. So out of the four new planets,
           | the only one I actually enjoyed building on was Vulcanus
           | (because it plays pretty much like vanilla Factorio but with
           | new recipes). The lead dev is also well known for disliking
           | logistics bots and wishes they had never been added to the
           | game. And the expansion shows that, with (again) three of the
           | four planets having mechanics to make use of bots more
           | difficult if not outright impossible (Aquilo).
           | 
           | All in all, the developers have a _very_ different vision of
           | what makes the game fun than I do, and that meant the
           | expansion wasn 't much fun for me. If I play the game more in
           | the future, I'll probably do so with the expansion disabled.
        
             | Tyr42 wrote:
             | Luckily, there are lots of mods which make the base game
             | more. I really enjoyed my bobs + angels run. I'm sure it
             | would be even more fun if you opted into quality on top to
             | really go mad.
        
         | vrighter wrote:
         | I had spent ages optimizing my maze solver (
         | https://github.com/VrIgHtEr/TheFarmerSolvedAMaze ).
         | Meticulously going over which operations take how many ticks.
         | But then the dev made a bunch of breaking changes and couldn't
         | be bothered to rewrite everything.
        
         | __jonas wrote:
         | > the dev was making breaking changes that would require a full
         | rewrite
         | 
         | This is funny because I already get the feeling a lot with
         | management sim / automation type games that I'm pretty close to
         | doing the kind of thing I'd do at work, except only the fun
         | parts and without getting paid. Often that's the reason I quit
         | playing these types of games after a while - having to deal
         | with migrating legacy code after breaking API changes would
         | bring this feeling to a new level I bet.
        
           | grogenaut wrote:
           | That's why I don't tend to play these games. I was about 5
           | hours into trs1000 when I was like man I could just learn GPU
           | or fpga with a real editor instead but that would be useful.
           | And stopped playing. With factorio I could be laying out
           | circuit boards. So I did that instead.
        
         | abtinf wrote:
         | To make a programming game true to life, it could have a
         | prestige mechanic where you keep all your code/scripts, but the
         | api introduces breaking changes and you have to rewrite.
         | 
         | "Good job! Halfway through the workday on Thursday, some big
         | brain engineer in a distant department has decided to change
         | the order of for loop clauses in the interpreter, so now it's
         | "for variable declarations; variable modifications; conditional
         | checks {}". They adamantly refuse to revert the change because
         | "it makes more sense to group variable stuff together". Prod is
         | down now. Have fun!
        
           | phantasmish wrote:
           | Documentation should often be wrong.
           | 
           | There should be five options for each piece of tooling, none
           | of which quite work the same way, all of which have a fan-
           | base singing their praises, and three of which have critical
           | problems you probably won't find out about until you try
           | them. Then the one you pick gets abandoned when you're part
           | way done. (this feature only for the Javascript and Python
           | DLC)
           | 
           | Example farms should use old versions of libraries that are
           | no longer maintained.
           | 
           | Interfacing with other farms should require manually faking a
           | downgrade of some protocol you're using, because the older
           | one is no longer available for you and they can't/won't
           | upgrade.
           | 
           | You should be forced to design certain parts of the system in
           | ways that are harder to use and constantly break when
           | changing other parts, just so the _appearance_ of those parts
           | is  "on brand". This should require re-writing functionality
           | that would otherwise be supplied "for free" by a library.
           | 
           | When you're finally getting things how you want them, your
           | farm should get cancelled and the whole thing abruptly burned
           | to the ground because your parent company just decided to buy
           | a different, existing farm instead.
        
             | abtinf wrote:
             | It's like you're an omniscient narrator for my career.
        
       | incomingpain wrote:
       | Solid 2-3 hours of entertainment; assuming you know python. It's
       | also not as complicated as I expected.
        
         | ckdarby wrote:
         | Currently a sweet spot with Steam games if you price them
         | correctly to the value they bring.
         | 
         | I'm working on a very simple incremental game that has exploded
         | in popularity called, A Game About Feeding A Black Hole.
        
           | unquietwiki wrote:
           | Just looked it up: looks cool & added it to wishlist. Did you
           | happen to play "Solar 2" years back?
        
           | mrguyorama wrote:
           | Did you pay DangerouslyFunny on Youtube to play that or does
           | he just play every new steam demo with incremental features?
           | It is his business basically.
        
       | jgtrosh wrote:
       | The game looks fun and pretty, but am I the only one to get
       | triggered by the "replaced" naming?
       | 
       | All of these eager claims to replace humans feel violently
       | antisocial. (And in many instances hypocritical if coming from
       | people who defensively claim "it's just a tool"...)
        
         | gruez wrote:
         | >am I the only one to get triggered by the "replaced" naming?
         | 
         | >All of these eager claims to replace humans feel violently
         | antisocial
         | 
         | Yeah they should be using corporate euphemisms like "let go" or
         | whatever!
        
           | lan321 wrote:
           | The farmer is taking the next step in their career journey!
        
           | blargthorwars wrote:
           | You're absolutely correct. A better name would be "The Farmer
           | Was Augmented <emdash> By Your Friendly AI" <emoji "happy">
           | <emoji "friednship">
        
           | afandian wrote:
           | More like "the farmer was sent to live on the farm"
        
         | aduwah wrote:
         | The Farmer Was Made Into Sausage By Automation
        
         | sebstefan wrote:
         | Farming isn't artistry, society benefits from its automation
         | 
         | Is it still bad if the farmer gets replaced?
        
           | 9rx wrote:
           | _> Is it still bad if the farmer gets replaced?_
           | 
           | A farmer is an owner of a farm. To replace the farmer you
           | would have to completely eliminate the entire concept of
           | human ownership that we hold. Socialist or other community
           | ownership structures around farms wouldn't do as that would
           | not replace the farmer, it would make everyone a farmer.
           | 
           |  _> society benefits from its automation_
           | 
           | Economies benefit from its automation. It's far less clear if
           | societies benefit. Farm work is hard, but there is a sense of
           | accomplishment when it is done, which is good for the psyche.
           | The never ending "bullshit" jobs that most people seem to
           | find themselves in nowadays has not lead to happiness.
        
             | sebstefan wrote:
             | > To replace the farmer you would have to completely
             | eliminate the entire concept of human ownership that we
             | hold.
             | 
             | Why?
             | 
             | > Economies benefit from its automation. It's far less
             | clear if societies benefit. Farm work is hard, but there is
             | a sense of accomplishment when it is done, which is good
             | for the psyche. The never ending "bullshit" jobs that most
             | people seem to find themselves in nowadays has not lead to
             | happiness.
             | 
             | "Farming is good for the psyche" doesn't hold to the
             | suicide rates.
             | 
             | Automate hard jobs where people kill themselves or destroy
             | their bodies, future generations get jobs that are easier
             | on the body and they get to live healthy longer. It's not
             | rocket science!
             | 
             | Why aren't you a farmer?
        
               | 9rx wrote:
               | _> Why?_
               | 
               | I already attempted to explained why. If there is a gap I
               | overlooked or if something wasn't made clear, you're
               | going to have to try and work with me with greater
               | specificity.
               | 
               |  _> "Farming is good for the psyche" doesn't hold to the
               | suicide rates._
               | 
               | Farmers are known to have high suicide rates, but being
               | the owner doesn't imply doing the work. That is the role
               | of the farmhand. I cannot find anything to suggest that
               | suicide rates are high for farmhands.
               | 
               |  _> Why aren 't you a farmer?_
               | 
               | I don't understand your question. I am a farmer.
        
               | sebstefan wrote:
               | Ok I get the confusion
               | 
               | The framing of the debate is not using your terminology
               | so this isn't useful
               | 
               | Being a farmer isn't owning a farm, it's doing the
               | farming. Farmhands are farmers. This is the definition
               | that most people have, and if we use your definition, the
               | entire debate doesn't make sense. Remember we're talking
               | about a game, and the game is called "replacing the
               | farmer", in which you don't play a humanoid android
               | handing out cash to a previous owner to buy a farm and
               | then sitting on his ass paying out farmhands. The game is
               | about automating the farming. There is no reference to
               | ownership.
        
               | 9rx wrote:
               | _> Being a farmer isn 't owning a farm_
               | 
               | Not according to the government. To legally become a
               | farmer you need farm receipts of a certain amount or
               | more. Selling your labour to a farmer is not that. And
               | not according to the dictionary either. There are
               | multiple words surrounding this topic for good reason.
               | 
               |  _> Farmhands are farmers._
               | 
               | It is possible that a farmer also works on his farm, or
               | another farmer's farm for that matter, but they would be
               | a farmhand while in that capacity. People can be more
               | than one thing, unsurprisingly. But not all farmers are
               | also farmhands and not all farmhands are also farmers.
               | Many farmers never lift a finger, so to speak. I
               | personally work with farmers who don't even know what is
               | growing in their fields.
               | 
               |  _> Remember we 're talking about a game, and the game is
               | called "replacing the farmer"_
               | 
               | Actually, we were talking about some pedantic take on the
               | word "replace", which transitioned into a pedantic take
               | on the word "farmer". There is no discussion about a game
               | going on in this thread. This indicates that you didn't
               | bother to read the thread before replying. Why?
        
               | almosthere wrote:
               | I agree with you here. It's kind of like programmers are
               | not really programming anymore (well many aren't they're
               | telling AI what to do). Our "program-hand" is the LLM.
        
               | 9rx wrote:
               | Telling what an AI/LLM what to do is programming in the
               | same sense that telling a C++ compiler/virtual machine
               | what to do is programming. In both cases you're just
               | describing in language what you want the machine to
               | execute.
               | 
               | But you may have a point that programming hasn't been a
               | thing since toggle switches were the only input into a
               | computer.
        
               | ImPostingOnHN wrote:
               | _> > Being a farmer isn't owning a farm_
               | 
               |  _> Not according to the government._
               | 
               | Why would we care what _they_ think? Depending on the
               | government we 're talking about, that could be an
               | ignominious distinction. One government that comes to
               | mind most recently focused its efforts on creating fake
               | memes and myspace pages of political opponents, to troll
               | them, while the same government failed to provide basic
               | services to its people (and continues to do so).
               | 
               | Instead of asking the government what words mean (Orwell
               | wrote on this idea), we can just ask the people what the
               | words mean. And the people say that 'farmer' includes
               | folks doing the actual cultivation, even if they don't
               | own a thing.
        
               | 9rx wrote:
               | _> Why would we care what they think?_
               | 
               | Well, with the exception of Hong Kong, which isn't
               | exactly a farming mecca, Singapore, and Eswatini, all
               | other English speaking countries are democratic. Which
               | means that the government and the people are the very
               | same thing, so when the people have decided that's what
               | farmer is, that's what farmer is to basically everyone
               | (there are always outliers who like to go against the
               | grain, of course).
               | 
               |  _> we can just ask the people what the words mean._
               | 
               | There's an old saying: "Actions speak louder than words".
               | People will make up bullshit if you ask them. More
               | revealing is to look at how people actually use the word
               | "farmer" in practice. And it turns out that we do -- and
               | then record that use in a book known as the dictionary.
               | Like I said in an earlier comment, it echoes the same.
               | 
               |  _> And the people say that  'farmer' includes folks
               | doing the actual cultivation_
               | 
               | Sure. There are also people who use the word "farmer" to
               | refer to someone who creates web/social media content.
               | But these are outlier uses. Obviously all words have been
               | made up on the spot, and can be made up on the spot
               | (again) any time you so wish. You've not stumbled upon
               | any kind of revelation there. But in going that way
               | you've made it clear that you're not paying attention to
               | the discussion that is taking place.
        
           | cies wrote:
           | I like the word farmer to be replaced.
           | 
           | It usually means EITHER land cultivator OR animal exploiter.
           | 
           | My choice of word maybe gives away that I'm not so okay with
           | the latter category. While I think the first category is
           | doing God's work on earth feeding the ever growing human
           | population.
        
             | 9rx wrote:
             | _> My choice of word maybe gives away that I 'm not so okay
             | with the latter category._
             | 
             | I initially figured that use of the cultivator was also
             | intended to be in the same vein, as seen by the no-till
             | advocates. I was quite surprised that you later call it
             | God's work. Mouldboard mafia representing.
        
           | tantalor wrote:
           | What's so special about artists?
           | 
           | Farming is an ancient human practice. It would be a huge loss
           | to society if we forgot how to do it with our hands, without
           | automation.
        
             | abdullahkhalids wrote:
             | I don't disagree with your central point, humans were
             | creating art hundreds of thousands of years before they
             | started farming at large scales. Creating art is a fairly
             | fundamental aspect of our species.
        
         | hosteur wrote:
         | You are not alone. I don't get why you are downvoted.
        
         | pixl97 wrote:
         | >All of these eager claims to replace humans feel violently
         | antisocial
         | 
         | Then I suggest you dig ditches with a spoon.
         | 
         | The problem isn't replacing human labor in itself. It's a few
         | hording all the resources and leaving the rest to starve, aka
         | the luddites and why they revolted.
         | 
         | If you had a way to live, then boutique farming, or whatever
         | would be leisure if you chose to do that.
        
       | ceving wrote:
       | Is this Windows only?
        
         | mixel wrote:
         | No the game is also fully playable on linux via Proton (About
         | other platforms I have no clue)
        
           | intrikate wrote:
           | Excellent news, I can play the game on my Steam Deck with the
           | on-screen keyboard!
        
       | sd9 wrote:
       | I played this:
       | https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLesViK53beXfFohR1I08S...
       | 
       | Skip the first video. The early game is painful if you already
       | know how to program (they gate things like variables, loops, and
       | functions behind unlocks). And tbh I didn't know how to make a
       | video or use a microphone when I made that video. I just sat down
       | one evening and played it - I had no idea it would resonate with
       | people the way it did.
       | 
       | It's a great game, and I imagine a very good way to learn
       | programming in a goal oriented way. But I concur that there's not
       | a great deal of content if you already know how to program.
        
         | shhsshs wrote:
         | Fun to see you here - I discovered this game through your
         | videos! I think despite the lack of raw "content", I got a LOT
         | of playtime out of this game by trying to push higher on the
         | leaderboards.
        
           | sd9 wrote:
           | Awesome!
           | 
           | I've considered trying to do some hyper optimisation, taking
           | into account the number of cycles each instruction takes - it
           | seems that a lot of people are interested in that.
           | 
           | That's not my natural style though. I've had plenty of
           | criticism for not being performance sensitive, but that's not
           | really how I unwind (although I do plenty of optimisation at
           | work!).
           | 
           | It could be fun to explore ingame though.
        
       | slightwinder wrote:
       | Turtles are old-school, farming is the new cool. Is there a
       | dating-option? Just asking as a Stardew Valley-friend..
       | 
       | OK, jokes aside. I've started playing this, when 1.0 was released
       | some weeks ago, and this is quite good for what it is. It's doing
       | many things the right way, like allowing coding with an external
       | editor, having a proper coding-experience even with the built-in
       | tools, and collectable hats.
       | 
       | Everyone should buy this and learn the basics. It's cheap enough
       | for most people.
        
       | nilslindemann wrote:
       | I am playing this right now! A very nice, addictive game. The
       | programming language is a kind of subset of Python.
       | 
       | The in-game editor is still a bit clunky, but one can edit the
       | source code in an external editor like VS Code. The game has an
       | auto-reload option.
       | 
       | Caution! Just because one saves the code in the external editor
       | doesn't mean the entire game state is saved! It cost me a few
       | unlocked upgrades the first time I closed the game, not saving
       | because I thought it automatically does so. One has to save the
       | game state explicitly, before closing.
       | 
       | I already have the full game area and a max speed drone, but I'm
       | only just about to implement planting cacti. So it'll be a while
       | before I unlock multiple drones. But I have already implemented
       | efficient algorithms for planting a giant Pumpkin, Sunflowers and
       | Poly cultures.
       | 
       | What the game could have is that dictionaries retain their
       | insertion order and a built-in array.sort. And it is sad that the
       | nice music stops running as soon as one starts the game.
        
       | madethemcry wrote:
       | I did not play this (yet!), but just by watching this video I see
       | how it overlaps with the coding games on https://code.org/en-US
       | (Hour of Code!) in terms of having a code + gaming view to solve
       | a challenge.
       | 
       | When I was teaching coding to kids, code.org was the to-go place
       | besides using Scratch, to introduce coding patterns (mostly:
       | conditional, loops).
       | 
       | An example is the famous Minecraft labyrinth [1]. There is also a
       | Frozen themed one. If you have kids (~6y+), that's some fun way
       | to get started instead of diving directly into actual code.
       | 
       | [1]
       | https://studio.code.org/courses/mc/units/1/lessons/1/levels/...
        
       | djmips wrote:
       | teaching optimization this way seems ideal
        
       | mrguyorama wrote:
       | I bounced off this game.
       | 
       | It was fun and rewarding early on, as an idle game addict, but
       | there's a massive complexity cliff.
       | 
       | You go from "just plant the newest crop on every square" to
       | "Okay, now you need to manage farm-wide state in a way that the
       | tools do not support, and develop powerful planning systems and
       | priority systems to actually yield meaningful results and higher
       | level crops" and I just don't understand why.
       | 
       | The reward for rewriting an entire working (nice and simple)
       | system to a behemoth full of complex logic and systems
       | engineering is.... another crop? At least until you get to spawn
       | new drones which is locked off until you've already basically
       | beaten the game for some reason?
       | 
       | Like it feels like there is massive missing transition and
       | _purpose_ to that complexity. In factorio, you deal with the
       | insanity of petrochemicals because it gives you fun toys.
       | 
       | I found myself quite unable to engineer an entire system like
       | that just to... improve my rate of resource growth. Somewhat.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-11-04 23:01 UTC)