Do you think cheesing methods should remain in the game

[Auth]

I think the ancient guardian needs a complete fight rework rather than "fix him able to get cheesed"

[Josonic]

17 hours ago, Lumpa1227 said:

Cheese will exist no point in whining about it it's like you guys think making a thread about it will make all cheap tactics go away. Like the devs  don't know there own game (uh how long do my posts need to be moderated 

I didn't whine or make this thread to try to get klei to do anything. I made this thread because I heard people on both sides of the argument arguing numbers without actually having data to back it up. Please don't put words in my mouth or assume my intentions

[Lumpa1227]

34 minutes ago, Josonic said:

I didn't whine or make this thread to try to get klei to do anything. I made this thread because I heard people on both sides of the argument arguing numbers without actually having data to back it up. Please don't put words in my mouth or assume my intentions

 I don't care what your intentions were look at the responses of this thread look at what it has done so I'm responding to that whether you had any thought that this would happen is inconsequential to me  I don't care about people's feelings 

[Lumina]

Some cheesing will go away, like some bugs did when they were fixed in the past.

[TheKingDedede]

8 minutes ago, Lumpa1227 said:

 I don't care what your intentions were look at the responses of this thread look at what it has done so I'm responding to that whether you had any thought that this would happen is inconsequential to me  I don't care about people's feelings 

That barely makes any sense. Other users are responsible for their own responses, not the person who created the topic. If other users didn't want to create a response, then they could have just ignored the topic.

[Lumpa1227]

and there responses were whining about cheese and it still doesn't matter 

[Rellimarual]

I dunno, it seems worthwhile getting votes on the cheese issue, since not everyone wants to post their opinion to a topic, especially considering how much shade gets thrown about that stuff. I wanted to see the results of the poll.

[Apchi]

I don't like cheesing methods. They're make the game look buggy. Beginning with the koalefant (who can be stuck in the corner) and ending with the bosses. The best way - is to remove all cheesing possibilities and add more different attack variations to bosses, so fight will be fun and not just "hit and run" * n times (toadstool is the closest to this idea atm). Honest way of killing Bee Queen does look really great! When there's 6 players and they are really trying hard to kill her. At the same time Wickerbottom's way with tentacles does look soooo boooooring. It's not even a challenge... I don't have to mention moon stone with wardrobes  . It's a shame. I want to be proud that I've got moon caller's stuff... but I can't, because it's too easy.

[GiddyGuy]

1. Cheese, check.
2. Whine, check.
3. Baguette, unchecked.
4. 

[Lumpa1227]

Well to all those people that say it makes the game with buggy well duh half the time it is a bug not the developer  unless in a few cases and makes these ways intentional and most the time in don't starve you can tell Its a bug if not all the time but that's the thing that makes cheese so hard because even if you fix it you might make another bug which could lead to a Another cheese method

my God I saw the fallout from when they fix the laturn and all the angry cries saying it wasn't a bug it was a feature  or it was a strategy and by that logic everyone who cheats in pro gaming isn't cheating they're just using  strategy by manipulating code which which anybody can do so God help the developers if they decide to fix the bugs in there AI so when they do release an update it's met with a middle finger 

 I am sorry that was the dumbest display this community has ever done that I've seen but I'm sure something will top it we already have veteran players are complaining The game is too easy because the game is just meant for them the top 5% nobody else and no one ever goes to the Steam forums where most of the player base can be found so they can get a more accurate opinion it's always hear where the same 300 people have been here since the forms birth

[Lumpa1227]

29 minutes ago, GiddyGuy said:

1. Cheese, check.
2. Whine, check.
3. Baguette, unchecked.
4. Warning point
5. thread lock

Ftfy 

[TheKingofSquirrels]

On 2017-5-23 at 11:44 PM, Destros09 said:

I agree, dst is more causal oriented than titan souls or ninja gaiden

 

On 2017-5-23 at 11:42 PM, xxVERSUSxy said:

NOPE, NO "cheese" AT ALL! Who needs a fun/campy game when one can bash ones head on the kite-and-tank front?! Kite-and-tank, heal, kite-and-tank, repeat! Creativity?! God forbid that, EWW! If we're talking of qwerty dexterity, let's have a league or ranking system as well, we need to make it official-and-pinned-down for "bragging rights"

 

Irony and jokes aside, some tweaking could do, like Ancient Guardian trying to get you from other side of pillar when stuck situation occurs. On the other hand taking Queen Bee out with tentacles is a viable alternative as work invested in said tentacle trap is quite of an endeavor and creative nevertheless (plus one doesn't just sit beside fire munching shoelaces, hammering and baiting can go pretty wrong at times, even more so if additional events happen).

If DST promoted kite-and-tank as the only fighting method, for me (and I'm sure many others as well) game interest would have died a long time ago.

Oh, and no: difficult games like Dark Souls series should NOT be an example for anything DST-related please!

I disagree, I remember when DS was permadeath and was incredible.

Now, it´s a mess. 

[MondayNight]

17 minutes ago, TheKingofSquirrels said:

I disagree, I remember when DS was permadeath and was incredible.

Now, it´s a mess. 

And why do you think it was changed?

Maybe, just maybe, to make it more in tune to vast majority likings?! If you look at how Klei tackles player base (psychology-wise), plus the marketable and replayability value, you will know they empathizes a more lax, "do whatever you like, it's your world", stance. Most people value their progress (building and such) and adhere pretty much to the status quo bias; thus they don't like a generally punishing and harsh setup that can nullify their progress in a heartbeat or make advance too hard. Already a big chunk of said player base doesn't go past few days of survival and pretty much don't know what-is-what, what and how to do. On a more personal level, one of my friends gave up on DST precisely because he had no time or will to learn its ins and outs. Let's be hones, game already isn't newbie-friendly - and no, a game shouldn't be learned from external tutorials/videos, but by trial-and-error (if is not too complex; and DS/T, for better-and-worse, is a complex game). If you want harsher setup because of the thrill, just stop for a second and think at all that mass of players that just runs from danger or gaves up. It may have been "incredible" to you, but in pubs most of them casuals plain-and-simple quit. Thus again the question begging an honest, objective, answer: why do you think perma-death system was changed? And why DST should (or should not) be a game more in-tune with Dark Souls and-the-like (aka hardER) - from mass perspective (to be rhetorically representative), not the "1337" point of view.

[Lumpa1227]

38 minutes ago, xxVERSUSxy said:

And why do you think it was changed?

Maybe, just maybe, to make it more in tune to vast majority likings?! If you look at how Klei tackles player base (psychology-wise), plus the marketable and replayability value, you will know they empathizes a more lax, "do whatever you like, it's your world", stance. Most people value their progress (building and such) and adhere pretty much to the status quo bias; thus they don't like a generally punishing and harsh setup that can nullify their progress in a heartbeat or make advance too hard. Already a big chunk of said player base doesn't go past few days of survival and pretty much don't know what-is-what, what and how to do. On a more personal level, one of my friends gave up on DST precisely because he had no time or will to learn its ins and outs. Let's be hones, game already isn't newbie-friendly - and no, a game shouldn't be learned from external tutorials/videos, but by trial-and-error (if is not too complex; and DS/T, for better-and-worse, is a complex game). If you want harsher setup because of the thrill, just stop for a second and think at all that mass of players that just runs from danger or gaves up. It may have been "incredible" to you, but in pubs most of them casuals plain-and-simple quit. Thus again the question begging an honest, objective, answer: why do you think perma-death system was changed? And why DST should (or should not) be a game more in-tune with Dark Souls and-the-like (aka hardER) - from mass perspective (to be rhetorically representative), not the "1337" point of view.

 Yes we shouldn't be all so dead set on our  point of view we should be more neutral. catering to all the newbies or stabbing ourselves in the back  to Please all  the hard-core fans isn't going to do it either way. 

 But what do I know it's not like indie games need a constant stream of fans I've already got my warning. For stepping on toes might as will just be a watcher again

1 hour ago, TheKingofSquirrels said:

 

I disagree, I remember when DS was permadeath and was incredible.

Now, it´s a mess. 

Oh stop it take your nostalgia glasses off you know DS permanent death would not work you know why they made the decisions they did because it's a multiplayer game not single player anymore if you want the more harsh world play single player and get someone to mod the other content in for you no people on both sides of the argument are going to get exactly what they want 

[TheKingofSquirrels]

16 minutes ago, Lumpa1227 said:

DS permanent death would not work you know why they made the decisions they did because it's a multiplayer game not single player anymore

Hey, remember when Klei first announced Multiplayer and and they were like "don´t worry, we won´t stop developing single-player."

Oh, the memories. 

But seriously, **** content segregation. It´s unacceptable imo.

[TheKingofSquirrels]

57 minutes ago, xxVERSUSxy said:

And why do you think it was changed?

Maybe, just maybe, to make it more in tune to vast majority likings?! If you look at how Klei tackles player base (psychology-wise), plus the marketable and replayability value, you will know they empathizes a more lax, "do whatever you like, it's your world", stance. Most people value their progress (building and such) and adhere pretty much to the status quo bias; thus they don't like a generally punishing and harsh setup that can nullify their progress in a heartbeat or make advance too hard. Already a big chunk of said player base doesn't go past few days of survival and pretty much don't know what-is-what, what and how to do. On a more personal level, one of my friends gave up on DST precisely because he had no time or will to learn its ins and outs. Let's be hones, game already isn't newbie-friendly - and no, a game shouldn't be learned from external tutorials/videos, but by trial-and-error (if is not too complex; and DS/T, for better-and-worse, is a complex game). If you want harsher setup because of the thrill, just stop for a second and think at all that mass of players that just runs from danger or gaves up. It may have been "incredible" to you, but in pubs most of them casuals plain-and-simple quit. Thus again the question begging an honest, objective, answer: why do you think perma-death system was changed? And why DST should (or should not) be a game more in-tune with Dark Souls and-the-like (aka hardER) - from mass perspective (to be rhetorically representative), not the "1337" point of view.

There´s no reason why you can´t appeal to both people. Why isn´t there a hard mode? Seriously, it's just ridiculous. 

[Lumpa1227]

1 minute ago, TheKingofSquirrels said:

Hey, remember when Klei first announced Multiplayer and and they were like "don´t worry, we won´t stop developing single-player."

Oh, the memories. 

But seriously, **** content segregation. It´s unacceptable imo.

Well too bad it happens I know you're angry but sometimes people can't keep their promises

it's best just to Move On. Instead of just making a stink trying to get what  you lost back into the game when it's not going to happen

[TheKingofSquirrels]

1 hour ago, xxVERSUSxy said:

And why do you think it was changed?

Maybe, just maybe, to make it more in tune to vast majority likings?! If you look at how Klei tackles player base (psychology-wise), plus the marketable and replayability value, you will know they empathizes a more lax, "do whatever you like, it's your world", stance. Most people value their progress (building and such) and adhere pretty much to the status quo bias; thus they don't like a generally punishing and harsh setup that can nullify their progress in a heartbeat or make advance too hard. Already a big chunk of said player base doesn't go past few days of survival and pretty much don't know what-is-what, what and how to do. On a more personal level, one of my friends gave up on DST precisely because he had no time or will to learn its ins and outs. Let's be hones, game already isn't newbie-friendly - and no, a game shouldn't be learned from external tutorials/videos, but by trial-and-error (if is not too complex; and DS/T, for better-and-worse, is a complex game). If you want harsher setup because of the thrill, just stop for a second and think at all that mass of players that just runs from danger or gaves up. It may have been "incredible" to you, but in pubs most of them casuals plain-and-simple quit. Thus again the question begging an honest, objective, answer: why do you think perma-death system was changed? And why DST should (or should not) be a game more in-tune with Dark Souls and-the-like (aka hardER) - from mass perspective (to be rhetorically representative), not the "1337" point of view.

Also, I just have a lot more respect for games that don´t try to appeal to everyone by being easy and accessible. 

Recently, I started playing Hollow Knight and I bloody love it! And there´s people saying "Oh there should be an easy mode" for it. Drives me crazy. Games like Binding of Isaac, or Dark Souls, are satisfying because they are tough as hell and there isn´t a "easy mode" that you can switch too whenever things get hard.

A game looses something when you add that. It´s like when Minecraft added Creative Mode, whenever I see a cool building "Well, they just did it in Creative Mode, so what?". But if you saw a awesome building in the old alpha days, it was amazing. Same goes with Don´t Starve, bck in the day, getting to Day 100  MEANT SOMETHING, but now with Rollbacks, who cares?

But that´s just my opinion. It just makes me sad, cause I remember Don´t Starve being one those games that meant something. 

 

[TheKingofSquirrels]

9 minutes ago, Lumpa1227 said:

Well too bad it happens I know you're angry but sometimes people can't keep their promises

it's best just to Move On. Instead of just making a stink trying to get what  you lost back into the game when it's not going to happen

F-k that noise. 

[Destros09]

10 minutes ago, Lumpa1227 said:

Well too bad it happens I know you're angry but sometimes people can't keep their promises

it's best just to Move On. Instead of just making a stink trying to get what  you lost back into the game when it's not going to happen

 

Just now, TheKingofSquirrels said:

Also, I just have a lot more respect for games that don´t try to appeal to everyone by being easy and accessible. 

Recently, I started playing Hollow Knight and I bloody love it! And there´s people saying "Oh there should be an easy mode" for it. Drives me crazy. Games like Binding of Isaac, or Dark Souls, are satisfying because they are tough as hell and there isn´t a "easy mode" that you can switch too whenever things get hard.

A game looses something when you add that. It´s like a Minecraft added Creative Mode, whenever I see a cool building "Well, they just did it in Creative Mode, so what?". Back in the day, getting to Day 100 in Don´t Starve MEANT SOMETHING, but now with Rollbacks, who cares?

But that´s just my opinion. It just makes me sad, cause I remember Don´t Starve being one those games that meant something. 

 

Calm down and stay on topic, this is about cheesing not permadeath, cheesing is optional and can be ignored or modded out if you don't like it

[Destros09]

@ImDaMisterL this is getting out of hand can you lock it

[TheKingofSquirrels]

57 minutes ago, xxVERSUSxy said:

And why do you think it was changed?

Maybe, just maybe, to make it more in tune to vast majority likings?! If you look at how Klei tackles player base (psychology-wise), plus the marketable and replayability value, you will know they empathizes a more lax, "do whatever you like, it's your world", stance. Most people value their progress (building and such) and adhere pretty much to the status quo bias; thus they don't like a generally punishing and harsh setup that can nullify their progress in a heartbeat or make advance too hard. Already a big chunk of said player base doesn't go past few days of survival and pretty much don't know what-is-what, what and how to do. On a more personal level, one of my friends gave up on DST precisely because he had no time or will to learn its ins and outs. Let's be hones, game already isn't newbie-friendly - and no, a game shouldn't be learned from external tutorials/videos, but by trial-and-error (if is not too complex; and DS/T, for better-and-worse, is a complex game). If you want harsher setup because of the thrill, just stop for a second and think at all that mass of players that just runs from danger or gaves up. It may have been "incredible" to you, but in pubs most of them casuals plain-and-simple quit. Thus again the question begging an honest, objective, answer: why do you think perma-death system was changed? And why DST should (or should not) be a game more in-tune with Dark Souls and-the-like (aka hardER) - from mass perspective (to be rhetorically representative), not the "1337" point of view.

There´s no reason why you can´t appeal to both people. Why isn´t there a hard mode? Seriously, it's just ridiculous. 

[Lumina]

What would be a hard mode ? I mean, you have preset to make game harder, what a hard mode should bring that preset can't ?

 

25 minutes ago, TheKingofSquirrels said:

44 minutes ago, Lumpa1227 said:

 

Hey, remember when Klei first announced Multiplayer and and they were like "don´t worry, we won´t stop developing single-player."

Oh, the memories. 

I remember ShipWrecked. It's developement of single player. Wasn't really a success i guess, could explain maybe ?

 

14 minutes ago, TheKingofSquirrels said:

Games like Binding of Isaac, or Dark Souls, are satisfying because they are tough as hell and there isn´t a "easy mode" that you can switch too whenever things get hard.

Binding of Isaac is also random and could be a lot much easier when you have the right items. It's part of the fun, at least for me, when i was unable to reach the end with a certain stability, i still had the hope of finding enough powerful items and go further than usual, and this way i enjoyed the game, allowing me to become better, when i would maybe gave up without this part because of frustration. So i'm not sure you could apply this to Don't Starve exactly.

 

Also, something "tough as hell", when playing solo is understandable, something "tough as hell", when playing multiplayer and could die because of a [I will stay polite] annoying lag when you need to flee the tentacle/monster/whatever danger isn't the same thing. Same for the survival when you play with players that don't have the same knowledge than you.

[Cyberboy2000]

32 minutes ago, TheKingofSquirrels said:

Recently, I started playing Hollow Knight and I bloody love it! And there´s people saying "Oh there should be an easy mode" for it. Drives me crazy. Games like Binding of Isaac, or Dark Souls, are satisfying because they are tough as hell and there isn´t a "easy mode" that you can switch too whenever things get hard.

 

27 minutes ago, TheKingofSquirrels said:

There´s no reason why you can´t appeal to both people. Why isn´t there a hard mode? Seriously, it's just ridiculous. 

Oh okay so wanting to have an easy mode is a big no-no but a hard mode is perfectly fine. It's perfect logic trust me.

[ImDaMisterL]

Just leaving a reminder to stay on topic and to respect each other. I don't want to lock this thread, so as long as civil discussion can be maintained I won't have to do it.