Request to Port Over Hamlet + SW Characters

[Crimson Chin]

Ill start this off by saying I am of the opinion that major support for single player should have stopped when Don't Starve Together came out. It made little sense to me that time and effort were being used on what is essentially a less refined DST. I understand the argument of the players who want to play don't starve alone, but I feel that Klei could have easily scaled enemies and mechanics to be fit for single player and multiplayer. It was very confusing to me that the entire Hamlet DLC was designed and released for single player, while DST had a much larger community.  Now we are in this awkward state of having two versions of the same game receiving different amounts of support and content. I am not sure whether or not these two games have the same dev team working on them or not, but it is just weird either way. Anyways, it has been made clear that Hamlet and SW will most likely never come to DST. This is a real shame, as I feel a massive amount of content and potential was wasted. I understand that asking for DST Hamlet and SW might not be reasonable at this point, but I believe at least porting over characters from these DLCs would be reasonable. I believe that the latest Hamlet characters have been some of Klei's best character design. Both Wormwood and Wilba have strong INTERESTING perks that come with difficult downsides that change the way you play. SW characters are designed for their DLC, but I think they could just be reworked later on after the original set of characters have received their updates.

How would I do this? Well, I would prefer if Klei were to just release them all in one free update, but I understand how issues could arise from that. I think the most reasonable way to do it would be to give the characters to the owners of that DLC. What I mean by this is if you owned SW or Hamlet you would receive that DLC's characters to be used in DST too. I think this would add a pretty hefty chunk of content to the game and maybe a good chunk later on if those characters were to get tweaked to fit more into DST.

But, yeah.. It is such a massive shame to see all those characters left on single player without a hope to ever come to multiplayer. I don't see many ways that this could be a bad thing and I feel that it would give some more value to the DLCs.

 

[Auth]

For the most part, they've said they're against adding the DLCs to DST because if they did, it would split the playerbases into clumps of people, and they'd prefer to just have the majority of people on the same page of things.

I quite like the DLCs being singleplayer exclusive, they provide an interesting twist from the formula, but I still don't think they could or ever will hold up to the quality of the original. As such, I see the DLCs as a nice little "vacation" from the standard game, so I don't see how it's wasted content whatsoever.

I also never actually found any of the DLC characters to be interesting enough to warrant a port of themselves (Except maybe Warly, but he needs a lot of tweaking) so I can't really say I'm on board with all of them getting shipped to DST either.

[Lillyth]

I completely agree. I don't see Klei porting the expansions anytime soon, but the idea of giving the DLC's owners their respective characters is relatively realistic.

Seperate game DLC's aside, I don't see it as too big of an issue technically to bring them to DST. Skins are the only thing I can think of, but I'm sure players wouldn't mind having to wait a while for them if it means having access to their favourite DLC-character. Hopefully Klei will consider this!

[Crimson Chin]

3 minutes ago, Auth said:

For the most part, they've said they're against adding the DLCs to DST because if they did, it would split the playerbases into clumps of people, and they'd prefer to just have the majority of people on the same page of things.

I suppose I can understand this, but I feel there are other ways of monetization. Rather than just charging for the DLC they could have made money through skins and such. I do understand that it might seem more profitable to charge for it outright, but with the bigger player base of DST and more content to keep players coming I think they could have made a decent amount of money or even more!

 

7 minutes ago, Auth said:

I quite like the DLCs being singleplayer exclusive, they provide an interesting twist from the formula, but I still don't think they could or ever will hold up to the quality of the original. As such, I see the DLCs as a nice little "vacation" from the standard game, so I don't see how it's wasted content whatsoever.

 

As I said in my original post, I think it would have been more reasonable if Klei designed the DLCs to be multiplayer and single player friendly for DST. Don't Starve Together could be played alone, but Klei hasn't really tried scaling mob HP to amount of players or anything like that yet. If they had done this you would have been able to enjoy these "vacations" just as you are now on single player, but it also being available to people who would have wanted to play it in multiplayer. Once again, I completely get people wanting to play alone. I still do see the DLCs as wasted potential though. Multiplayer extends the life of anything greatly. Hamlet and SW are like.... different "maps". They play differently and require different things of you. As you said, its a change from the vanilla game. This would have added so much more to multiplayer if it was available to everyone. Also as I said, DST had a much bigger player base. Hamlet would have got a lot more attention if it was made for DST.

14 minutes ago, Auth said:

I also never actually found any of the DLC characters to be interesting enough to warrant a port of themselves (Except maybe Warly, but he needs a lot of tweaking) so I can't really say I'm on board with all of them getting shipped to DST either.

Yeah I understand SW characters not being too interesting. They were designed with SW in mind and would not really have much use in DST as they are now, BUT I think tweaking/reworking them is not an unreasonable thing to ask for. They are all characters with interesting designs that have a lot of potential. I don't really see why its a bad thing for them to be playable, even if they are uninteresting for now. I mean half the current roster is uninteresting, but they are receiving reworks finally. It could be an opportunity to add even more content through their reworks after all the content they have planned runs out.  And have you seen Wormwood? In my opinion, he is their best character yet. He has a real downside. You can't heal from foods. It changes the way you play, you can't just go around tanking hits and then just afking around a bunch of flowers to heal from butterflies. His perks are interesting enough to outweigh this downside. Wilba is interesting too. Im talking about her werepig transformation mainly here. She becomes a monster tank that is able to take and do some damage. Its also controllable, so you can plan appropriately plan to utilize it. BUT, of course it comes with a downside. You can't stay in it forever because of the rapid hunger drain.

[Stonetribe]

I've accepted the fact that Don't Starve dlc just wouldn't fit very well in a multiplayer setting a while ago, but I don't think that porting over the characters would be a bad thing at all! The biggest issue of course course is that they would require some pretty significant tweaking and overhauling to actually work, likely to the point where they wouldn't actually feel like said characters at all. (I'm looking at you Woodlegs!)

[Fuffles]

The Issue with those chars would be, ya know, they will be eventually boring and they were never designed for multiplayer, take for an example Walani vs Winona, Walani makes surfboards and dries faster, that's all lol, while Winona makes Catapults to defend bases and Spotlights to save you from Charlie. The difference is clear, Walani does nothing for the team because she's more aimed for SW than DS/DST, while Winona does. If they were to update old Chars, the issue would be a lot of time to do so, they rework chars in a month, as of now at least, so adding another I think 6 characters to that rework list is gonna be more weight for Klei to beat with. Also Skins, Im not sure what Treatment the Chars would get, if they join the classic Skin set route or take the Wortox approach of random skins put together. If it were the classic skin route, well have fun making like 10 skins for a single char (there are 6, so 60 full character reskins). Otherwise, DST is more Lore focused while DS drifted away after Adventure mode, don't forget that

[Unn0ticedShadow]

     I can't imagine the mess that would happen if people tried to import both Hamlet and Shipwrecked over to Don't Starve Together.  (Multiplayer would make it incredibly hard to code, and take tons of resources).  However, I see no reason why the majority of DST content, including bosses and (I believe to be) better armor balances should not be brought over.

    While the raid bosses are very hard to defeat, the majority of them are very much doable in singleplayer, and even so could be nerfed to a singleplayer scale.  While armor changes may be a bad idea with these stronger bosses, it would not hurt the majority of players and only provide a challenge for better players.  If DST content was moved over to DS, DST would still be a thing, being the only way to play multiplayer and people might actually get a bit more hyped for the DLCs, as basically anyone would be able to appreciate them. (Unless they for some reason needed to play with their friends.)

[Crimson Chin]

4 hours ago, FuffledBeeQueen said:

The Issue with those chars would be, ya know, they will be eventually boring and they were never designed for multiplayer, take for an example Walani vs Winona, Walani makes surfboards and dries faster, that's all lol, while Winona makes Catapults to defend bases and Spotlights to save you from Charlie. The difference is clear, Walani does nothing for the team because she's more aimed for SW than DS/DST, while Winona does. 

I have stated in one of my replies that I understand SW characters might not be very interesting in their current state, especially the one you have pointed out. Reworking them could easily fix this though. They all have interesting character designs and potential for Klei to work with. Even though I think some of the SW characters measure up to DST's right now, I do believe Hamlet characters are good to go in their current state. They would fit in just fine and measure up to the latest character/rework. You are right about Winona actually offering something to the team, but I don't really think that makes her much more interesting. Winona makes her catapults and that's really it. Winona can get boring, like any of the characters eventually can. 

4 hours ago, FuffledBeeQueen said:

If they were to update old Chars, the issue would be a lot of time to do so, they rework chars in a month, as of now at least, so adding another I think 6 characters to that rework list is gonna be more weight for Klei to beat with.

I don't see anything wrong with having work to do. The developers have the tools to do this. It seems that they try and use these monthly reworks as ways to bring players back into the game, so having more potential reworks wouldn't hurt. I also said how tweaking these DLC characters would be something to look into after all their planned content and character updates are finished. I am not saying they should overwork themselves by trying to release all these reworks and content updates at the same time.

5 hours ago, FuffledBeeQueen said:

Also Skins, Im not sure what Treatment the Chars would get, if they join the classic Skin set route or take the Wortox approach of random skins put together. If it were the classic skin route, well have fun making like 10 skins for a single char (there are 6, so 60 full character reskins).

I definitely think the random skin approach would be more manageable. I do think there is plenty of potential for sets if they wanted to do that too, but nobody said it has to release all at once. Take it slow, release them with only one skin. As someone else said I am sure players would not mind waiting for skins if it meant they got to play as their favorite DLC character. It would be more profitable in the long run. And hey! If they ported them over the way I suggested they might not even need skins. Having the DLCs characters playable on DST already gives players more incentive to buy it and DS.

5 hours ago, FuffledBeeQueen said:

Otherwise, DST is more Lore focused while DS drifted away after Adventure mode, don't forget that

I'm not sure what you mean by this or how it is relevant to what I have discussed.

5 hours ago, Unn0ticedShadow said:

     I can't imagine the mess that would happen if people tried to import both Hamlet and Shipwrecked over to Don't Starve Together.  (Multiplayer would make it incredibly hard to code, and take tons of resources.)

Yeah, I understand that. I'm not suggesting that. I was just saying how its silly that Hamlet was designed for single player in the first place. 

[Unn0ticedShadow]

How could have the developers designed shipwrecked/hamlet for DST, would there be two extra servers running at once?  That really isn't plausible in those DLCs, but there is no reason DST content can't go to regular Don't Starve, so it probably should, why not?

[Crimson Chin]

32 minutes ago, Unn0ticedShadow said:

How could have the developers designed shipwrecked/hamlet for DST, would there be two extra servers running at once?  That really isn't plausible in those DLCs, 

SW was released before DST gained its popularity. It was designed and made before multiplayer was finished. Of course I think it would be nice to port over to multiplayer, but I never got upset that it wasn't designed for it. Why would it be, multiplayer wasn't a big thing then. They didn't have a way of telling if it would be a hit or not. On the other hand, Hamlet was designed and made long after multiplayer fully released and gained popularity. This is what is confusing me. You are saying that it would be difficult for Hamlet to work, which is true because it was designed for single player. Hamlet would be completely different if it were designed for multiplayer, it might not even be Hamlet. That is the thing though, why was a DLC designed for single player when multiplayer was already released and popular? DST was the much more popular game and would have done much better with a big DLC update like Hamlet. In conclusion what I'm trying to say is a single player DLC had no reason to be made in the 1st place. In my opinion, all that work could have instead been made into a DLC for DST update like Hamlet.

 

32 minutes ago, Unn0ticedShadow said:

but there is no reason DST content can't go to regular Don't Starve, so it probably should, why not?

Yeah, I didn't say I was against that. I think it is just silly that single player is still getting major support.

[Mueck]

What would be the point of having a pirate character and a surfer girl character in a game without boats, waves, parrots, cannons and treasures?  What would be the point of having a monkey king and a pig princess without their respective subjects? Most of the singleplayer DLC characters would not only have to be tweaked with entirely new perks to work in DST (to the point of becoming unrecognizable), the main problem is in my opinion that their themes do not match the game's aesthetic. Why not let Klei's DST team (which is in fact separate from Hamlet) focus on developing new characters with innovative perks instead, like they have proved they can do with Wortox?

[Griver84]

Quote

On the other hand, Hamlet was designed and made long after multiplayer fully released and gained popularity. This is what is confusing me. You are saying that it would be difficult for Hamlet to work, which is true because it was designed for single player. Hamlet would be completely different if it were designed for multiplayer, it might not even be Hamlet.

So Ill give this the same description I give everyone on stream that asks me about why we don't have Shipwrecked together. The way DST is currently set up is:
Constant (overworld shard) > Underground Shard

Each shard requires you run a "server" to host any and all players moving around in them at any given time. To ADD Hamlet to this would require running a 3rd shard which most people have a hard time running even a second one for the caves system. Its WHY the ruins were added into the same map layer (and that all the cave entrances were combined into one map instead of 3) for DST.


Now before someone goes off and says "Well why can't they just ADD it to the overworld map layer for hamlet".  So to that I say: You want Klei, to take an ENTIRE DLC (5 islands/ruins maps/cave maps/HOUSING maps now/Mant Mound/etc) and compress it into a single map layer and drop it on an island outside the normal generation for the constant? I can't even begin to describe how terrible that would be. Not to mention the seasons don't line up (so it could be Lush season in Hamlet land and the middle of winter in the constant). So I'm ok with at best people modding in aspects of hamlet that I can use for now.

[Crimson Chin]

7 minutes ago, Mueck said:

 (which is in fact separate from Hamlet)

Finally, thanks for telling me this! As I said in my post and some of my replies, that's still silly.

10 minutes ago, Mueck said:

What would be the point of having a pirate character and a surfer girl character in a game without boats, waves, parrots, cannons and treasures?  What would be the point of having a monkey king and a pig princess without their respective subjects? Most of the singleplayer DLC characters would not only have to be tweaked with entirely new perks to work in DST (to the point of becoming unrecognizable), the main problem is in my opinion that their themes do not match the game's aesthetic. Why not let Klei's DST team (which is in fact separate from Hamlet) focus on developing new characters with innovative perks instead, like they have proved they can do with Wortox?

Well, I think these characters fit DST's aesthetic just fine. You seem to be exaggerating these characters to make them seem out of place. DST also has a walking spider child, a pig king, a genocidal robot, shadow monkies, etc... It doesn't seem absolutely insane to add some of these creative characters to the bunch. Besides, Wortox is a soul sucking imp, how does he fit in any better than the characters you just have listed? People keep bringing up Walani and leaving out characters, like Warly for example. I agree that she is the most out of place, but I am confident that Klei could easily tweak these characters without losing who they originally were. I feel everyone would be right at home in DST.

6 minutes ago, Griver84 said:

So Ill give this the same description I give everyone on stream that asks me about why we don't have Shipwrecked together. The way DST is currently set up is:
Constant (overworld shard) > Underground Shard

Each shard requires you run a "server" to host any and all players moving around in them at any given time. To ADD Hamlet to this would require running a 3rd shard which most people have a hard time running even a second one for the caves system. Its WHY the ruins were added into the same map layer (and that all the cave entrances were combined into one map instead of 3) for DST.


Now before someone goes off and says "Well why can't they just ADD it to the overworld map layer for hamlet".  So to that I say: You want Klei, to take an ENTIRE DLC (5 islands/ruins maps/cave maps/HOUSING maps now/Mant Mound/etc) and compress it into a single map layer and drop it on an island outside the normal generation for the constant? I can't even begin to describe how terrible that would be. Not to mention the seasons don't line up (so it could be Lush season in Hamlet land and the middle of winter in the constant). So I'm ok with at best people modding in aspects of hamlet that I can use for now.

You are missing my point. In the bit you quoted I am saying that Hamlet should have never existed if it wasn't going to work in multiplayer. These technical issues you listed for Hamlet wouldn't be issues if Hamlet was designed from the ground up for multiplayer. In that very reply I have stated that I understand why SW together is not a reasonable thing to ask for. SW being designed for singleplayer wasn't confusing back then since DST was just made and still had to do some growing. 

[Griver84]

I feel like I have to point out something here... While Klei isn't a huge studio, they aren't a small one either. They have teams for DS/DST/ONI/Hot Lava/etc... While there may be some overlap in people between the teams (im guessing). Each team has its own development pipeline and goals.

The DS team was tasked with creating a DLC for the Solo Experience. Not the DST team. So saying that they shouldn't have developed Hamlet at all unless it was going to be for DST as well is to me, well personally insulting. Hamlet breathed a wonderful breath of fresh air into the already stagnant DS experience. Shipwrecked came out in 2015ish I think? So its been 4 years of nothing. I'm nothing but ecstatic that they brought more content to the solo experience and that its separate from DST. Its what I love about both games. The experiences while similar are very different.

[Dead_Riot24]

The only one i would really like to see in DST is Wormwood because i feel he plays so different to any other character. 

[Crimson Chin]

1 hour ago, Griver84 said:

I feel like I have to point out something here... While Klei isn't a huge studio, they aren't a small one either. They have teams for DS/DST/ONI/Hot Lava/etc... While there may be some overlap in people between the teams (im guessing). Each team has its own development pipeline and goals.

As I've said multiple times in this thread, DS and DST are pretty much the same thing. DS just being the lesser game at this point. I believe if these two teams just worked together they could create some excellent content. They could have worked to create an experience that is multiplayer and singleplayer friendly. 

 

1 hour ago, Griver84 said:

The DS team was tasked with creating a DLC for the Solo Experience. Not the DST team. So saying that they shouldn't have developed Hamlet at all unless it was going to be for DST as well is to me, well personally insulting. Hamlet breathed a wonderful breath of fresh air into the already stagnant DS experience. Shipwrecked came out in 2015ish I think? So its been 4 years of nothing. I'm nothing but ecstatic that they brought more content to the solo experience and that its separate from DST. Its what I love about both games. The experiences while similar are very different.

Well firstly I don't understand what you are getting offended by. Please read my posts and replies, I guess I'm sorry if I didn't make this clear. I wasn't trying to say Hamlet was a terrible hopeless garbage dumpster truck bonfire of bad ideas that shouldn't have gone anywhere. I'm saying that it should have been designed from the ground up to be multiplayer. I love Hamlet! That is one of the reasons I made this post! You say that it breathed a breath of fresh air into DS, but it could have done that to multiplayer! If they saw something would not work well in multiplayer it should have been tweaked. While Hamlet might have ended up being a different experience in some ways, it would have been multiplayer and available to everyone on their much more popular game. The team responsible for Hamlet deserved to make some profit. This just....didn't happen as well as it could have. DS has a much smaller player base and obviously lacks multiplayer. For many multiplayer is a big selling point. It could have been a way to keep players coming to DST after getting tired of the "stagnant DS experience", as you said. I feel they could have made much more profit for their creative work in the long run if it were designed for DST, from the returning players and new players this update might have attracted. You are talking about a singleplayer experience, but I just don't understand this. When I play don't starve I feel like I'm just playing a less refined DST, but maybe that's just me. What is this solo experience that you are talking about?

[Bluegeist]

I was thinking, what if they "refreshed" the SW and HAM characters to be compatible with DST, like they are refreshing the DST cast? Give them true-to-character perks that are compatible with whatever updates they are bringing to DST soon. That would be neat, but I'd say if such a thing could happen it wouldn't happen until next year, after the Roadmap stuff.

My concerns are more lore-based, with the SW/HAM characters not being in DST, it feels like they are getting left behind. So I hope that somehow, someway they all get a proper lore treatment.

[Hornete]

44 minutes ago, Crimson Chin said:

As I've said multiple times in this thread, DS and DST are pretty much the same thing. DS just being the lesser game at this point. I believe if these two teams just worked together they could create some excellent content. They could have worked to create an experience that is multiplayer and singelplayer friendly. 

 

Well firstly I don't understand what you are getting offended by. Please read my posts and replies, I guess I'm sorry if I didn't make this clear. I wasn't trying to say Hamlet was a terrible hopeless garbage dumpster truck bonfire of bad ideas that shouldn't have gone anywhere. I'm saying that it should have been designed from the ground up to be multiplayer. I love Hamlet! That is one of the reasons I made this post! You say that it breathed a breath of fresh air into DS, but it could have done that to multiplayer! If they saw something would not work well in multiplayer it should have been tweaked. While Hamlet might have ended up being a different experience in some ways, it would have been multiplayer and available to everyone on their much more popular game. The team responsible for Hamlet deserved to make some profit. This just....didn't happen as well as it could have. DS has a much smaller player base and obviously lacks multiplayer. For many multiplayer is a big selling point. It could have been a way to keep players coming to DST after getting tired of the "stagnant DS experience", as you said. I feel they could have made much more profit for their creative work in the long run if it were designed for DST, from the returning players and new players this update might have attracted. You are talking about a singleplayer experience, but I just don't understand this. When I play don't starve I feel like I'm just playing a less refined DST, but maybe that's just me. What is this solo experience that you are talking about?

DS and DST are 2 seperate games. Lore-wise DST is the sequel, for the last year the DS team has been working on hamlet and for the last year the DST team has been working on something too. I mean we've been starved a year without any real update and it feels like something b i g is coming, what i'm trying to say is lets wait to see what april and the upcoming months have for us. Hell you never know DST's new updates might be "better" than hamlet! All we can do is wait.

[Crimson Chin]

21 minutes ago, Omaremad74 said:

DS and DST are 2 seperate games. Lore-wise DST is the sequel, for the last year the DS team has been working on hamlet and for the last year the DST team has been working on something too. I mean we've been starved a year without any real update and it feels like something b i g is coming, what i'm trying to say is lets wait to see what april and the upcoming months have for us. Hell you never know DST's new updates might be "better" than hamlet! All we can do is wait.

DS and DST are not two different games. They are separate games maybe, but DST really is just more polished DS. Lore-wise DST is just as you said, after it. Aside from the polish/multiplayer, DST and DS are the exact same thing. DS has different DLCs, but that comes down to the point I made. Why would they make a DLC for their less popular/less polished game? And yeah about the new DST content. We already know at least something is happening at the end of April. That wasn't really the point of this post though, it was to talk about my beliefs in some of Klei's major decisions and request a port of these characters. We can only hope DST's new content is, as I said in my previous replies, a big DLC update like Hamlet. A big point I have been trying to make is that Hamlet could have been that big DLC like update, but it was designed for singleplayer instead.

[Hornete]

Just now, Crimson Chin said:

DS and DST are not two different games. They are separate games maybe, but DST really is just more polished DS. Lore-wise DST is just as you said, after it. Aside from the polish/multiplayer, DST and DS are the exact same thing. DS has different DLCs, but that comes down to the point I made. Why would they make a DLC for their less popular/less polished game? And yeah about the new DST content. We already know at least something is happening at the end of April. That wasn't really the point of this post though, it was to talk about my beliefs in some of Klei's major decisions and request a port of these characters. We can only hope DST's new content is, as I said in my previous replies, a big DLC update like Hamlet. A big point I have been trying to make is that Hamlet could have been that big DLC like update, but it was designed for singleplayer instead.

That's exactly was the QoL update was for, To polish DS to have more of the things in DST. Still a bit different but what they are aiming for are 2 games with different content. It's as simple as that and it's what klei is working towards.

[Crimson Chin]

6 minutes ago, Omaremad74 said:

That's exactly was the QoL update was for, To polish DS to have more of the things in DST. Still a bit different but what they are aiming for are 2 games with different content. It's as simple as that and it's what klei is working towards.

Oh dear, the QoL update. That didn't go so well if you remember. Klei even wrote an apology on some youtube video. Scrolling the crafting wheel would crash the game, leaving it almost unplayable for an hour or so. Even if it was functional, it didn't polish anything at all. It added some... polish from DST like being able to hold an item in your hand while performing actions, but that's really it. No animation canceling or skins. It added beefalo riding, an entirely pointless feature that had some potential, but was taken ultimately nowhere on DST. Beefalo riding was completely broken...for what at least a day or so? There are still many bugs to work out. I still don't understand how they are two different games in your eyes. You say there is different content, but there isn't.That is like saying if I added a big update to a game I just made I can sell the older version of the game without the update and claim they are different games.

[Well-met]

Sadly I agree.

putting heavy emphasis and focus on DS1 will ultimately mean the end of updates for DST. The workload will eventually overwhelm Klei and force them to choose one of them to focus on. There's no other outcome. It's happened to other companies and will happen here.

[Hornete]

Just now, Crimson Chin said:

Oh dear, the QoL update. That didn't go so well if you remember. Klei even wrote an apology on some youtube video. Scrolling the crafting wheel would crash the game, leaving it almost unplayable for an hour or so. Even if it was functional, it didn't polish anything at all. It added some... polish from DST like being able to hold an item in your hand while performing actions, but that's really it. No animation canceling or skins. It added beefalo riding, an entirely pointless feature that had some potential, but was taken ultimately nowhere on DST. Beefalo riding was completely broken...for what at least a day or so? There are still many bugs to work out. I still don't understand how they are two different games in your eyes. You say there is different content, but there isn't.That is like saying if I added a big update to a game I just made I can sell the older version of the game without the update and claim they are different games.

That's what they are, 2 different games with different content.

DS would get DLCs while DST gets different free content. It's how they are doing it and that's how it is.

[Bluegeist]

5 minutes ago, Crimson Chin said:

Oh dear, the QoL update. That didn't go so well if you remember. Klei even wrote an apology on some youtube video. Scrolling the crafting wheel would crash the game, leaving it almost unplayable for an hour or so. Even if it was functional, it didn't polish anything at all. It added some... polish from DST like being able to hold an item in your hand while performing actions, but that's really it. No animation canceling or skins. It added beefalo riding, an entirely pointless feature that had some potential, but was taken ultimately nowhere on DST. Beefalo riding was completely broken...for what at least a day or so? There are still many bugs to work out. I still don't understand how they are two different games in your eyes. You say there is different content, but there isn't.That is like saying if I added a big update to a game I just made I can sell the older version of the game without the update and claim they are different games.

Well, they are different in ways that make DST multiplayer and DS not. The Old Bell cannot be crafted in DST (anti-griefing reasons I think), the ghost system, Tell-Tale Hearts, cave generation, etc. Those are pretty significant differences.

[Hornete]

Just now, Bluegeist said:

Well, they are different in ways that make DST multiplayer and DS not. The Old Bell cannot be crafted in DST (anti-griefing reasons I think), the ghost system, Tell-Tale Hearts, cave generation, etc. Those are pretty significant differences.

Also DS has DLC's and DST got a new reign with klaus, beequeen, toadstool, antlion and much more. Seems quite a difference in content.