That's never happened, and I don't think that that will ever happen.

Why haven't you put X feature into the base game?

It can't be that hard.

There's already a mod for it.

So there's a mod for that is a very popular phrase within the Satisfactory community.

But again, this is another thing that it's only natural that there are features that have been made into mods that haven't been made into the base game yet.

There are a few reasons for it.

It could be that we don't want to make it.

Maybe we've tried it.

We don't want it.

Maybe we like the idea, but it sort of breaks balance in the game or something.

And so it's probably not a good idea for the base game, but it's great as a mod.

It could also be that we actually plan to, that it's in the plans, that we want to do it later.

We just, the modders beat us to it.

That's all.

But the other thing that you need to sort of remember here is that there are different levels of responsibility between what features we add to the game and what features modders add, because there are different contexts here.

And two contexts are, one, mods are free and they're opt-in.

This is super important.

They're opt-in.

You choose how you want to modify

your gameplay experience.

Base game features are features that are not opt-in, they're there for everybody and they're designed to appeal to everybody from minute zero of playing the game into hundreds of hours of playing the game for people with different kinds of play styles, right?

People pay us, they've paid for the game.

They expected a specific level of quality, stability, all that kind of stuff.

So we have a higher level of responsibility for features we add.

We can't just add random features willy-nilly.

We rarely add one feature at a time.

That's something you'll notice.

We add a host of features, right?

Because a lot of features need to interact with other features or need other features to be justified in their own existence.

Like, all of these things are carefully calculated and designed and thought through every time we add anything to the game.

Not to mention that we have to make sure that they've got- they attain a certain level of visual quality,

User experience quality, UI needs to be up to scratch, it needs to be stable, it needs to perform well.

It cannot break the balance of the game.

If you break the balance of the game, a lot of features start to crumble on top of each other and stop making sense.

So, like, these are a lot of things that we need to take into account whenever we add literally anything to the game.

But modders don't have to do that.

They don't have that responsibility.

They can make whatever they want.

And if people like that thing, they can just add it.

If they don't like it anymore, they can remove it.

So with that difference in mind, that is why there will always be features that aren't yet in the game or may never come to the game.

Now, I hope it doesn't sound like I'm like shitting on mods and saying that mods are like broken, that they're all inefficient and that they lack quality.

That's not the case at all.

Some mods are absolutely outstanding in their quality, but I just want to just highlight that there is a difference in responsibility here between a developer's base game feature

and a modder's feature.

It's the wild, wild west when it comes to mods, but we don't have that luxury.

And I think it's a good thing.

I think it's nice that both exist.

People can be safe knowing that we will always ensure that there's a good base game experience for anyone who plays the game.

And then it's nice to know that they can also then modify their gameplay experience if they wish to do so themselves.