Originally posted by Rhapsody:

And that kinda sums up what's wrong with the entire thinking behind your observations. It's just you, not the game or anyone else.

Originally posted by Rhapsody:

Sigh. In other words, you're only ruining the game for yourself if you think it's not going to be well without Surtr or Hel.

Valheim has already done well enough. It's not going to break even if you break the game for yourself in the way you describe.

Originally posted by Rhapsody:

What you described at the end of your otherwise valid observations is just very self-centered and self-defeating. It's nothing to do with your person. It's about your message. Criticism on your comment is not the same as attack on your person. You can read about that on Wikipedia or elsewhere on the net (the "ad hominem" you casually dropped there).

Originally posted by Vazkulator:

How am I ruining the game for myself by looking at content creations relevance with their theme and nature of the game ?

Originally posted by Rhapsody:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Originally posted by Vazkulator:

How am I ruining the game for myself by looking at content creations relevance with their theme and nature of the game ?

Because you are essentially building a fence between yourself and the game.

Valheim is a viking culture inspired game. It's not viking or norse mythology simulator.

As an example, Surtr has already been defeated. That's what surtlings are. There's a chance that ashlands will feature a boss that is some sort of amalgamation of them, but it likely won't be the ragnarok-bringing fire giant whom even the gods couldn't slay (and whom was, in Valheim's setting, felled by First Men whom the current vikings are mere echoes of).

Originally posted by Vazkulator:

If you truly cared about difficulty, the things you would be arguing about would be something like;
- more engaging of combat mechanics.
Rather than flat artificial difficulty

- more complexity in utilizing weapons and side accessories.
Rather than aesthetically theme/nature breaking fogs and creature content

- improved general balance with fluidity of synnergetic procs through buffs & debuffs.
Rather than creating an environment that is hostile against replayability that creates just more reasons for people to open the console to fly past all that it was originally meant to be.

Originally posted by sirstevolot:

Originally posted by Vazkulator:

If you truly cared about difficulty, the things you would be arguing about would be something like;
- more engaging of combat mechanics.
Rather than flat artificial difficulty

- more complexity in utilizing weapons and side accessories.
Rather than aesthetically theme/nature breaking fogs and creature content

- improved general balance with fluidity of synnergetic procs through buffs & debuffs.
Rather than creating an environment that is hostile against replayability that creates just more reasons for people to open the console to fly past all that it was originally meant to be.

-Like weak spots on enemies that currently exists? Like parries, kiting, using bombs/meads, managing stamina/eitr? Pretty engaging imo.

-See above, but also I've made functional hybrid builds regarding almost every weapon or armor in the game at varying stages of the game. Get creative and change your gear depending on the biome you're exploring.

-Solo player, multiple play-throughs, no mods or console commands because I love the game how it's meant to be. "Replayability" as you say is present already and it's still early access lol. I can't wait for more content but I have a lot of world on multiple chars left to explore and plunder so I'm contented with the adventures I take myself on.

The vision of Valheim is in the hands of IG, let us consumers remember that. We can offer suggestions, but I lean towards letting the artists do their thing :D

Originally posted by Webbman:

You might have meadows folk syndrome. This is where your ideas about what valheim should be are in heavy conflict with the developers vision which is alot more malleable than yours.

surtr and hell will never be in the game because we are in valheim. It is its own thing hence bosses like bonemass and the elder that have absolutely nothing to do with norse legens and myths.

Originally posted by Vazkulator:

Am I the only one under the impression that valheim is heading down a steep hill of killing itself without a vision for the future and confused of its own identity and lacks respect for what brought Valheim its success in the first place.

Originally posted by Vazkulator:

Future content in regards for Surtr and Hel is really a make or break deal for Valheim to redeem itself

Originally posted by Rhapsody:

Originally posted by Vazkulator:

Am I the only one under the impression that valheim is heading down a steep hill of killing itself without a vision for the future and confused of its own identity and lacks respect for what brought Valheim its success in the first place.

Probably not, but you're not very many either.

Originally posted by Vazkulator:

Future content in regards for Surtr and Hel is really a make or break deal for Valheim to redeem itself

Seems like big gamble to lock your stance behind introduction of mythological creatures whose very existence defies understanding, but you do you.

Originally posted by Rhapsody:

I don't think you understood what I'm trying to say, the fault is probably mine.

You're only limiting yourself by considering a certain individual mythological being's existence in the game being "make or break" for the game. It's not. Maybe for you, but not for the game.