Let players assign their own stats for the first 3 dupes.

[Merauder]

My Philosophy for random rolls and other RNG, is that if re-rolling is as easy as hitting the shuffle button when assembling your crew at the start of a new game, then you might as well not bother with random luck. Either give us the ability to assign our own stats, or simply don't give us a reshuffle button and have their stats locked-in.

Right now, I find myself simply reshuffling until I hit an optimum crew composition. I do this 10 minutes long if I have to, or more.

So, if I can't be prevented from obtaining a specific crew through random luck or wasting time, then why erect such unnecessary barriers in the first place? I think it would be better if you allowed players to simply pick their own optimum crew. This would make the game more user friendly. Give me 10 or so points and a list of traits - fallout style - and let me be on my way instead of what we have currently.

EDIT2: Each dupe having their own predetermined personality (just like the cast of Don't Starve), or all starter/arrival dupes being more or less the same low stat slobs that need to be trained, would do me just fine as well. You're smart Klei. I've confident you can come up with a challenging, new alternative to RNG with this suggestion.

EDIT1: If this were implemented, I would also really like for the game to still have the first three suggested dupes to be random, before we decide for ourselves to assign our own. That, and a big "random" button that gives players the ability to once more, completely randomize the dupes.

This suggestion will allow the hardcore players, as well as those liking more control, an equal opportunity to play the game their way.

[SmallMuffin11]

Yup, the rerolling 1000000 times is just time wasted

[Shade84]

Then, the most reasonable build would be to give all three dupes max strength, as it is the only stat that can't be trained, if I'm correct.

[Lumina]

First because players could like doing specials challenges like "playing only with the dupes the game give me". Second, because players doing like you do, rerolling during 10 minutes, aren't the most common, so for normal players, there is a moment when having a ok dupe is more important than rerolling again and again and losing time, instead of playing. Third, since you will not be able to choose stat in the future, it's more consistant if you can't choose them for the first dupe, or people will be confused and frustrated. Like "I was able to choose my dupes and i choose a team without [insert stat here] thinking i will choose a new dupe with this after, but now i can't choose the stat of my dupe in game, this isn't fair".

So i think it's better not being able to control and have the perfect time, the players should control themselves and not abuse the rerolling.

[Pika2]

11 minutes ago, Lumina said:

First because players could like doing specials challenges like "playing only with the dupes the game give me". Second, because players doing like you do, rerolling during 10 minutes, aren't the most common, so for normal players, there is a moment when having a ok dupe is more important than rerolling again and again and losing time, instead of playing. Third, since you will not be able to choose stat in the future, it's more consistant if you can't choose them for the first dupe, or people will be confused and frustrated. Like "I was able to choose my dupes and i choose a team without [insert stat here] thinking i will choose a new dupe with this after, but now i can't choose the stat of my dupe in game, this isn't fair".

So i think it's better not being able to control and have the perfect time, the players should control themselves and not abuse the rerolling.

You could add a "randomize dupes" button, many games have something like it. For example, Magicite. The game originally forced you to randomize your perks but people didn't like it, so they changed it and now you can chose, and it was a choice for the better. The reason people don't re-roll much is because they want to play, correct, but that doesn't mean the people who want to chose shouldn't get it. Again, small groups will disagree with removing it, but its a single player game. Let people play how they want to. You could add a tutorial saying "You get to chose your dupes stats at the start, but later on you wont be able to." and if people don't listen, its their fault, not that the games. People who spend 10 minutes re-rolling are not abusing it, but they just aren't getting what they want. Say you wanted a box of orange juice, which you like but you think apple is better. If you could spend 10 minutes waiting and get the apple juice instead of orange, why is it wrong to do so?

[Pika2]

What about the negatives though? Maybe have every certain amount of points you get a negative trait, or have a bunch of combinations that you can filter through with things you want / don't want, like you could say:

• No narcopletic 
• At least 5 creativity
• Decor expectation of below 10
• Amphibious

and then it would look if there are any dupes that fit that combo, if they were it would show them, if they weren't it would say like "The duplicate printer couldn't find any dupes like that, try changing your filters" so then people don't make really OP guys.

[Merauder]

34 minutes ago, Lumina said:

First because players could like doing specials challenges like "playing only with the dupes the game give me". Second, because players doing like you do, rerolling during 10 minutes, aren't the most common, so for normal players, there is a moment when having a ok dupe is more important than rerolling again and again and losing time, instead of playing. Third, since you will not be able to choose stat in the future, it's more consistant if you can't choose them for the first dupe, or people will be confused and frustrated. Like "I was able to choose my dupes and i choose a team without [insert stat here] thinking i will choose a new dupe with this after, but now i can't choose the stat of my dupe in game, this isn't fair".

So i think it's better not being able to control and have the perfect time, the players should control themselves and not abuse the rerolling.

The "playing only with the dupes the game gives me." seems like a gameplay choice, just like I make the choice to re-roll until I get good ones. That's not an argument against my suggestion. In fact, there's no reason why the game shouldn't be able to facilitate both playstyles. I get to create my own starting team if I want, and you're happy to just accept what you're given at first.

"rerolling during 10 minutes, aren't the most common, so for normal players" Do you have the statistics to back that up? Even so, that's not an argument against my suggestion. There's no reason why it couldn't be included, even if we are a minority, which isn't certain.

"since you will not be able to choose state in the future" Interesting. I did not know the devs were planning to remove our ability to pick dupes in the future. Where is that stated? And wouldn't we be boned if we get a particularly bad team?

 

Again, I'd be happy for them to remove the random element, but if they do, I'd like to see them go full haul and remove ALL the random elements and predetermine each dupe.

Like I said, this system in between, is what I resent. It shouldn't be based on both luck and the player reshuffle. Either strip more or all luck away out of the process, or give us more control.  Either give us the ability to create our own dupes, or Klei should predetermine and better balance the entire process.

 

"So i think it's better not being able to control and have the perfect time, the players should control themselves and not abuse the rerolling."

And now you're just forcing your gameplay style on others, instead of allowing the two to co-exist. Maybe you're the minority, happy to just go ahead with whatever in a genre where most other players delight in control over their world. You're entitled to your opinion of course, but saying that you think it's better to take options away from others is a bit mean.

[Merauder]

7 minutes ago, Pika2 said:

What about the negatives though? Maybe have every certain amount of points you get a negative trait, or have a bunch of combinations that you can filter through with things you want / don't want, like you could say:

• No narcopletic 
• At least 5 creativity
• Decor expectation of below 10
• Amphibious

and then it would look if there are any dupes that fit that combo, if they were it would show them, if they weren't it would say like "The duplicate printer couldn't find any dupes like that, try changing your filters" so then people don't make really OP guys.

Like I said; I imagine these things to happen fallout style. Not fallout 3 or 4, but fallout 1 and 2.

Certain negative traits come with a bonus that make it worth selecting them, either to stats or something else. Loud sleepers are a menace, but maybe they don't ever get cranky when interrupted themselves. Or, they have more strength or something.

If we are in the process of selecting our stats and we have a pool of 10 points, certain negative traits could give you more points to spend. 

 

I would also be in favor of hiding negative traits,

or, like I said in my initial post: that each Dupe has their own predetermined set of stats and traits and random chance no longer influences it. I'd be satisfied in them becoming more reliable characters of their own right. It'd prevent us from cheesing it.

[Lumina]

7 hours ago, Merauder said:

 

"since you will not be able to choose state in the future" Interesting. I did not know the devs were planning to remove our ability to pick dupes in the future. Where is that stated? And wouldn't we be boned if we get a particularly bad team?

 

I mean, it's already the case. You can't change the dupes you have in game, with the printing pod. So it will be very inconsistant to have a "free to spend point" at the beggining and "fixed stat" after, and not very good for design, because people will not understand why it's different. And of course, the purpose is to give you a set of dupe when you are in game, not letting you free to choose.

In the future, here, is in the future of a game, not in the future of the game.

 

7 hours ago, Merauder said:

And now you're just forcing your gameplay style on others, instead of allowing the two to co-exist. Maybe you're the minority, happy to just go ahead with whatever in a genre where most other players delight in control over their world. You're entitled to your opinion of course, but saying that you think it's better to take options away from others is a bit mean.

Yes, totally. Me saying "I think it's better" is totally me forcing my gameplay.

But sorry, i will maintain it. I think it's better. And this is my opinion, the "I think" is pretty clear about it. It's not forcing anyone.

You disagree with me, fine. You think your idea is better, fine. But saying me i force something is false, and this is a way to shut me up, like the "maybe you are the minority". So please, you can tell me you think it's better the way you suggested, after some reasons like i did, and i could disagree.

 

But let me add that giving player control isn't necessarily a good thing, and yes, it could be better to take options away from other player, it's not mean, it could be a design choice. Maybe, for exemple, Klei want you to not reroll forever, but don't want you to do tedious things like "OK, i used my 10 rerolls, i will create a new game until i have the dupes i want". So they let infinite rerolls as a convenience. But the purpose could still be "Players should try to do with what they have", with a little flexibility so you can avoid ending with 3 dupes unable to perform research or something totally unplayable.

But maybe yes, the game isn't about rolling 3 perfects dupes without downside, and the fact that you could do it now at a cost doesn't mean that it should become even more easy. Because some parts of the fun come to the fact you don't have perfect control, or should be, like the fact that you can't choose to have the perfect design around the start area. It is also what make the replayability great, the fact that maybe you'll have a nice dupe offered next time or a very good starting area.

 

So yes, i'm agaisnt giving more options, because giving more option isn't always meaning giving more fun. And maybe it's the case for you, and some players, but maybe more players will lose fun because of options that will remove some spice of the game.

 

And maybe i'm wrong. It's possible. But still, i'm not forcing you, i don't have the power to change the game, i can just discuss it, like you do. Are you forcing the game to change ? No, you are just suggesting it. Do i force players to don't have choice ? No, i explain why not having total control (because we have choice) could be better. It's a personal opinion, you could disagree, and Klei will do whatever seems fine to them, which is perfectly ok, so no one is forced by some lines i write. I'm not that powerful.

[Palpetinus]

Just remove the buttons entirely and add a "shuffle all" button. Now try getting your ideal crew, once you have that I'll have hit cycle 100 already.

[vonVile]

It could be like the game Project Zomboid. You can design your character with good traits, but have to balance them with negatives. You can start the game balanced at zero or in the negative, but not in the plus column. The game has tons of traits and bonus attributes through job profession to use at your choosing. If anybody wants I could list them all.

[Merauder]

3 hours ago, Lumina said:

In the future, here, is in the future of a game, not in the future of the game.

 

Yes, totally. Me saying "I think it's better" is totally me forcing my gameplay.

But sorry, i will maintain it. I think it's better. And this is my opinion, the "I think" is pretty clear about it. It's not forcing anyone.

You disagree with me, fine. You think your idea is better, fine. But saying me i force something is false, and this is a way to shut me up, like the "maybe you are the minority". So please, you can tell me you think it's better the way you suggested, after some reasons like i did, and i could disagree.

 

But let me add that giving player control isn't necessarily a good thing, and yes, it could be better to take options away from other player, it's not mean, it could be a design choice.

...

So yes, i'm agaisnt giving more options, because giving more option isn't always meaning giving more fun. And maybe it's the case for you, and some players, but maybe more players will lose fun because of options that will remove some spice of the game.

 

And maybe i'm wrong. It's possible. But still, i'm not forcing you, i don't have the power to change the game, i can just discuss it, like you do. Are you forcing the game to change ? No, you are just suggesting it. Do i force players to don't have choice ? No, i explain why not having total control (because we have choice) could be better. It's a personal opinion, you could disagree, and Klei will do whatever seems fine to them, which is perfectly ok, so no one is forced by some lines i write. I'm not that powerful.

Ah, that clears it up. I understand your observation about the "future" dupes now.

Yes, but the difference between your and my suggestion remains, that my suggestion still allows for your playstyle AND mine. Your suggestion disables my playstyle. And last time I looked up the definition of suggestion, it is something along the lines of "the desire and express wish to see it happen." Again, I respect and read your opinion that it's better, and I respect your desire to destroy other people's playstyles as being a necessary sacrifice, but only if you also respect my ability to form an opinion on your opinion.

And suggesting a playstyle is a minority is only unfair when I do it, and not when you do it?

" rerolling during 10 minutes, aren't the most common, so for normal players "

Okay. Clearly you are the only person fit to decide what's common and normal. When I more carefully suggest it MIGHT be the opposite way around, I'm shutting you up. Okay, got it.

 

I will say this though: while it MIGHT not be common to reroll a million times, it very definitly ISN'T common for a procedurally generated game to give you no options at all.

Look at Let's Starve: We're still able to select our own character. If we were to superimpose your playstyle on that game, both the world and character would be random.

In fact, the grand majority of procedurally generated survival games, at least allow you to select your own character. Saying that it's better to remove all that, appears to go against the trend and what every other game of the genre already does. I surmise that it is that way in all those other games, is because the majority of the players like that.

 

I respect your playstyle and wish for it to survive. It's why I'm not making suggestions that would deprive the game of random chance. In fact, I'm amending my suggestion. Aside from picking our own dupes, there should be a "random" button somewhere that allows people like you to be at the whim of chance.

I hope you can also respect my playstyle and not make the suggestion that it should completely be removed because that fits how you play the game Lumina. That's the difference between your suggestion and mine.

[Merauder]

3 hours ago, Palpetinus said:

Just remove the buttons entirely and add a "shuffle all" button. Now try getting your ideal crew, once you have that I'll have hit cycle 100 already.

Again, removal of player option, away from what we have now.

Why give people less options?

We can't all be as hardcore as you two, or derive all our fun from that.

 

Nothing I suggested gets in the way of your playstyle. It'd be courteous to do the same.

[Merauder]

I've amended my main post Lumina, Palpetinus.

Aside from more control over the dupes, I've also suggested and wished for the first 3 options to be random, as well as a random button that will allow you guys your own playstyle, along with us players that like a more controlled playstyle.

This way, everyone should be happy and nobody's playstyle need exclude the other.

 

Your playstyle is still expressly there and left unchanged. The two need not exclude the other. I respect your playstyle, you can respect ours, and ONI can have what Don't Starve and nearly every other procedurally generated survival game has: The ability to choose a set character in a random world.

That is; dupes set by either the player, or dupes preset by Klei as their determined personality. I'd welcome either. I just don't welcome the randomness of having a really poor team of lumps.

[Palpetinus]

Hey, this is a forum, we do open discussion here. You suggest your suggestions, I suggest mine.

[Lumina]

1 minute ago, Merauder said:

 

Look at Let's Starve: We're still able to select our own character. If we were to superimpose your playstyle on that game, both the world and character would be random.

Not really, your suggestion would more be "i could choose what feat i want, like book of wickerbottom, sanity of maxwell and rain damage of WX-78", because what you want is total control, not ability to choose set perk and downside.

Mine is not being able to have total contol, so it's fine for Don't Starve, it could stay as it is.

12 minutes ago, Merauder said:

Yes, but the difference between your and my suggestion remains, that my suggestion still allows for your playstyle AND mine.

It's your mistake. It's, for me, one of the biggest mistake on suggestion, in any game. It's in the "If you don't like it, don't use it".

 

Because the players aren't in two groups. "Random character" and "Choosen stat character". It's far more complex. There are players that will still choose to play random character. There are players like you that WANT to choose stat. There are player that don't care. And there are players that are fine with random stats, but give them the possibility to choose and they will be, either lost or frustrated. And you'll see some topic like "what is the best stat to choose ?" "Optimal choice for starting" "Don't take [stat whatever], it's a waste of point", and all this kind of stuff. People restarting games because they didn't choose the perfect point in the perfect stat, when they could have fun anyway. Uniformisation of profile because one expert player said that "this stat is better, because you can't progress in it during game so start with it".

 

I'm not saying all of this is wrong. It's perfectly ok to create this kind of situation for a game wanting to encourage this kind of behaviour. For example, a competitive game could encourage players finding the best stats to be better than others. I know games with this kind of system and it's fine for them.

 

But if you have random and choosen stats, they will not have the same values. Allowing both playstyle is one thing. But you can't protect one playstyle to the effects of the others. Let's say i could choose a random character, and an efficient, perfectly balanced one. Why would i choose the random one if i feel it's a loss ?

So random choice will be changed by the add of choosen stat, it will become less attractive instead of a challenge you should compose with. It will in fact remove choice. You feel like you add choice, in fact you remove them. Because if now i have some attractive but not optimised character, i will probably think "ok, it's not that bad, i will keep it". With choosen stat, it will be "ok, i will choose my stat instead, it will be better". Because, as i said, players aren't in "random" or "choosed stat" teams, players are players, with a lot of different behaviour, and if you give me the power to do something efficient, i will probably use it.

And even if it seems good, maybe it's not. Because it affects all the game, not just choice of players, because it affects the way you see the game, the kind of game it's, the way people will interact with it, the ambience. Because it will affect the suggestions, the future request.

And you can ask for a change. But you should really keep in mind that your change isn't just changing how you choose your character, but a lot of things about what the game is, and how players react to it.

 

So Klei could decide to do whatever they want about this point, and change it if they want, of course. But this change could have far deeper consequencies and will affect others playstyles, yours will be the default playstyle and current one will be the minor one, because as you said, players want control, and if you give them control, they'll use it.

And if you add the "choosen stat", and if player complain about it in the future, the answer will be "if you don't like it, don't use it", like if the choice was real, when it's not true, when random isn't a equal choice with choosen stat, and it's why, no, the current playstyle will not be unchanged. It's why it's not "let us play freely, it doesn't change anything for you, you can play like now", because it's not the case, adding a "choosen stat" option will change the game for a lot of players, even players fine with the random option at the moment.

 

And it's why i'm against it, because it will affect playstyle of players. And because yes, forcing a certain playstyle for player is sometime better than letting them choice, it's also that that make the gameplay.

So i still think that it's not a good idea, and really, it's not a neutral idea. The "choosen stat" idea has his restriction too. So no, stop saying that people agaisnt this idea are egoist people not wanting to allow others playstyles that will change nothing for them. You are as egoist as us, wanting to force a new playstyle to exist. You have all the right to suggest it, but you must understand it's not neutral. And you will force players to something too. Just not the same thing than now, but something too.

 

So please, stop this behaviour. I respect your idea, i don't agree with it, not because i want you to not enjoy the game, but because i think your idea will have deeper consequencies that you think and so i can't approve it.

 

(Also, i'm not hardcore.)

[Merauder]

8 minutes ago, Palpetinus said:

Hey, this is a forum, we do open discussion here. You suggest your suggestions, I suggest mine.

And so we did and we will continue to. Thanks for contributing.

[Merauder]

1 hour ago, Lumina said:

Not really, your suggestion would more be "i could choose what feat i want, like book of wickerbottom, sanity of maxwell and rain damage of WX-78", because what you want is total control, not ability to choose set perk and downside.

 

Because the players aren't in two groups. "Random character" and "Choosen stat character". It's far more complex. There are players that will still choose to play random character. There are players like you that WANT to choose stat. There are player that don't care. And there are players that are fine with random stats, but give them the possibility to choose and they will be, either lost or frustrated. And you'll see some topic like "what is the best stat to choose ?" "Optimal choice for starting" "Don't take [stat whatever], it's a waste of point", and all this kind of stuff. People restarting games because they didn't choose the perfect point in the perfect stat, when they could have fun anyway. Uniformisation of profile because one expert player said that "this stat is better, because you can't progress in it during game so start with it".

Be aware, I don't mean there to be no downsides. I'm not into the ability to create peeps that have maximized stats in anything. I would like negatives to be tweaked to have positive sides, and vise versa. It's why I mentioned Fallout 2. In that game, there were a lot of benefits, but no optimum playstyles. I'm confident that Klei could do something similar. 

And no, again, I don't want the best of everything. It's why I'd be very much satisfied with Klei predetermining each dupe. It's just that I want to be able to avoid all three dupes being lumps, or all three of them being good at one job at the detriment of all else. This, is not an unreasonable request. Allowing player control is one, but there are others.

Your argument that my suggestion of a new system would require a lot more thought and tweaking is fair, but that's where the argument stops. It can be done and just being hard, shouldn't prevent us from thinking it through or executing if we find a solution.

How do you feel about predetermining all dupes? Or, having all dupes look alike stat-wise in the beginning?

We can have a discussion about this where we explore the posibilities.

 

Quote

 

I'm not saying all of this is wrong. It's perfectly ok to create this kind of situation for a game wanting to encourage this kind of behaviour. For example, a competitive game could encourage players finding the best stats to be better than others. I know games with this kind of system and it's fine for them.

But if you have random and choosen stats, they will not have the same values. Allowing both playstyle is one thing. But you can't protect one playstyle to the effects of the others. Let's say i could choose a random character, and an efficient, perfectly balanced one. Why would i choose the random one if i feel it's a loss ?

So random choice will be changed by the add of choosen stat, it will become less attractive instead of a challenge you should compose with. It will in fact remove choice. You feel like you add choice, in fact you remove them. Because if now i have some attractive but not optimised character, i will probably think "ok, it's not that bad, i will keep it". With choosen stat, it will be "ok, i will choose my stat instead, it will be better". Because, as i said, players aren't in "random" or "choosed stat" teams, players are players, with a lot of different behaviour, and if you give me the power to do something efficient, i will probably use it.

 

So, now I'm a bit confused. Don't you, or do you, like the randomness Lumina?

If you do like and defend the randomness, then why is it a problem? If you like Random, the playstyle is still there for you. If preselection is a weaker form of play, then why feel intimidated by its existence? I don't see how this is a zero sum game.

To top it all off, this is a SINGLE PLAYER game. You don't need to compete with people who have the option to select a more optimized start. Your own choices, if you're an adherent of randomness, don't relate to what others do.

All I'm reading here is that you don't feel secure enough to have the fun you do with your game, if others don't have fun in the exact same way as you, which is... well, still not very nice. And I'm sorry, but that is actually the hardcore gamer's argument. It's complaining that a really hard game you like, has an easy mode. Who cares if others are discussing what the optimal stats are? It SHOULDN'T take anything away from you unless you're obsessed with others, controlling the amount of fun they have and being the best in a single player game yourself.

 

Quote

And it's why i'm against it, because it will affect playstyle of players.

Doesn't matter. Single-player game. Your option, still there, while we work en making ours more robust. I'm also not suggesting to take all challenge away. Just get rid of the extreme outliers of the RNG.

 

Quote

And because yes, forcing a certain playstyle for player is sometime better than letting them choice, it's also that that make the gameplay.

The gameplay challenges are determined primarily by the systems we see in the game, no at start-up. With so much randomness assigned to our start-up selection, it's also entirely possible to get the same team of super dwellers you now fear I propose. Wouldn't that ruin all gameplay? Gameplay rules and mechanics should be more solid than that.

 

Quote

 

And it's why i'm against it, because it will affect playstyle of players. And because yes, forcing a certain playstyle for player is sometime better than letting them choice, it's also that that make the gameplay.

So i still think that it's not a good idea, and really, it's not a neutral idea. The "choosen stat" idea has his restriction too. So no, stop saying that people agaisnt this idea are egoist people not wanting to allow others playstyles that will change nothing for them. You are as egoist as us, wanting to force a new playstyle to exist. You have all the right to suggest it, but you must understand it's not neutral. And you will force players to something too. Just not the same thing than now, but something too.

So please, stop this behaviour. I respect your idea, i don't agree with it, not because i want you to not enjoy the game, but because i think your idea will have deeper consequencies that you think and so i can't approve it.

 

I'm NOT advocating the complete destruction of all gameplay mechanics. I expect Klei to be smart enough to hand us a balanced, fair and tough system as a replacement where gameplay challenges remain, while removing the whim of extreme random chance all the same.

When that is understood, the ONLY way in which ANY of this PRACTICALLY affects you, is that there are now people who enjoy the game in a way that's different from how you enjoy it. There's nothing here but your psychological inability to share your toys and the fear that the lesser kids in the ball pool might enjoy them in a way you look down on.

You might not be hardcore, but you make hardcore arguments.

 

Now, how do you feel about predetermining all dupes? Or, having all dupes look alike and be low stat-wise in the beginning? That better? I'm more than willing to come to an understanding and coming up with a new, challenging system, other than the one where people stick their heads in the sand and don't want to change anything because that's scary.

What we have now is clumsy and breaks gameplay all the same on extremely poor or good rolls.

[Lumina]

33 minutes ago, Merauder said:

So, now I'm a bit confused. Don't you, or do you, like the randomness Lumina?

How to explain this simply ? When player have choice between fun and efficiency, player could either be frustrated not having fun by being efficient, or frustrated not having efficiency when having fun. Best solution is that being efficient is also being fun, or at least, close in fun to others options, so people could enjoy being both.

Choosing stat is efficient. Is it more fun ? It could for some player (because they like being efficient and take pleasure in optimisation). But it could also make the game less fun because reaching efficiency could be less fun, because it could make the game boring, because of various reason.

So yes, if choosing stat is added to the game, i could end using it because i will think that optimising will bring me more fun, and be wrong, when the randomness without others choice could lead me to enjoy the game as it is and playing instead of having to read forum to know if tis stat is useless and i should spend my point anywhere instead.

So choosing stat isn't necessarily better, and i think design wise, randomness bring something better for the game and the player. Players don't always do the wise things, me included. It's why game design is important, to ensure people could have fun, and to avoid asking them do to tedious things.

You never see game when players complain about something being too tedious because it's rewarding, so they want to do it for the reward, but it's not fun, but they do it anyway ? This is pretty common. This is the same thing here.

 

Maybe the system could be improved. But your idea is a change, not an improvement. It could be better, it could be worse.

 

Anyway, since you continue to insult people that are against your suggestion, i will stop answering for a moment.

[Merauder]

Oh, stop acting so hurt and self-righteous. You've been yammering on about me now knowing what I'm doing for the entire thread, exaggerating what my ignorance would do, sneak in an attempt to marginalize my position, then accuse me of doing the same, and also feeling hurt about that. Meanwhile, I don't take offence where you get your panties in a knot.If I were to say that doing that made you come across as a sanctimonious ****, it'd be the first and only insult in here. And yes, you can put that one in your pipe and smoke it.

Again, the alternates suggested here aren't as bad as you prop them up to be. I'm not breaking the game. If you look down upon this suggestion as boring and easy, I expect you to have the willpower to ignore it. Plenty of games have sandbox modes or cheats that didn't irrevocably ruin it for everyone since they can just stay clear, and I'm NOT EVEN suggesting anything of the kind for ONI. I'm suggesting a different kind of challenge free from luck.

If you don't think my suggestion is an improvement; fine. Just don't feel offended or intimidated by it all the damn time. I'm not looking to take the game away from you. Your feeling of danger and bereavement is woefully misplaced.