Exploit versus Intended Design?

[Darkin Coaled]

Should I be concerned that none of you seem to know about soap?

The real exploit is washing your hands and still flushing free germs down the pipe for use elsewhere in the base.

[Loscil2]

On 7/28/2019 at 10:00 PM, Dosephshih said:

I saw many discussion about "exploit" which is not well defined universally, and it is somehow subjective.

Some design is "exploit" to myself, then I will try to avoid it, while it may not be "exploit" to others, then they may use it. 

I think the developer does not give the official definition easily because they don't want to limit the player's creativity, especially before they have a solid change plan.

I believe this is the stance devs have over things like this. Fun triumphs over a game being balanced. Although your definition of fun can vary.

[axxionx12]

20 hours ago, Daxterr said:

Holy **** that's probably the smartest ONI idea I've ever seen. O_O

I'll put up a design of it. Also, I'll be sharing a way of producing extra power by using ATs to heat petroleum generators so their polluted water output is steam once it hits the ground. Using 2 ATS cooling my base and 4 generators, I can run 5 steam engines at about 300w (no external cooling needed for the turbines at this level).

[TLW]

5 hours ago, Loscil2 said:

Fun triumphs over a game being balanced.

And gameplay trumps realism for realism's sake.

If I wanted realism, I'd go outside.

[Pentalis]

On 7/28/2019 at 7:26 PM, Scyth02 said:

Has Klei ever given official word regarding certain behaviors in the game that some consider exploits and if they are by design or will be fixed in the future? A previous example of this is the recent changes to water sieves. Current examples include using germy water for sinks or small packets not state changing in pipes (plenty more though). Seems like if it makes it past the official launch then that is by design, but it would be nice to have official word.

I'll have my go at responding this from my own experience, since many players have already done so here.

I think @DrSugarFreeman hit the nail on the head with his post:

On 8/3/2019 at 1:39 AM, DrSugarFreeman said:

Its a subconscious ideal that you're not subjecting yourself to the full challenge of the game, and are therefore detracting from the experience for yourself by not solving problems practically and thoughtfully but instead solving them cheaply and through an oversight in the games code.

Why do I play the game in normal mode instead of sandbox mode? Because I want to experience the game as the challenge that was intended to be; I also tend to play all these survival/strategy/simulation games unmodded for the same reason (Rimworld, Don't Starve, ONI, Thea, etc). Since I want to play the game "as the challenge that it was intended to be" I do care about whether something seems like it was intended gameplay or not; and sometimes as I build my base I explicitly avoid doing things in a way that seem to run against the "logic" of the game (according to me, since this is my game experience, and I decide how I go about it), one example is using germy water for showers and bathroom sinks, I don't do it. On the other hand, I do use the Steam Tubine for heat sinking but it was very deliberately made to do that.

As for the word "exploit" I'd be careful with it, since it's a loaded word and it will ultimately alienate some people who read it applied to them (as we could see in this thread). Now, having said that, here is MY take on deciding whether something "was intended or not": it's not black and white! but some things are clearly more intended than others. Look for example at the way players will "break" games to do their Speed Runs, see how they surf over the sky on a shield in Zelda Breath of the Wild after landing on an enemy, or how they enter temples by hitting the side of the temple instead of using the door; those are pretty obvious non-intended game mechanics. Since the word "exploit" is loaded (it may sound like "cheat"), what other word do we have to refer to the way players use those bugs to improve their speed runs? Note that under the rules of the competition, they're not cheating; well, they use the word "glitch" a lot, so let's roll with that...

To glitch or not to glitch?

Is it wrong or is it right?

It depends on what your goal is!

If you want to challenge yourself, and _only_ challenge yourself, you can come up with any self-imposed rule and try to roll with that, or you can change the game's difficulty settings or explicitly choose an unfavorable asteroid and see how you fare. But if you, like me, have that "ideal of subjecting yourself to the full challenge of the game" (as @DrSugarFreeman so aptly put it), then things that are obvious glitches (Alchemist Stone, Borg Cubes) may not be up your alley, while other things that are cheap, but within the game's rules (like the Steam Turbine heat sink, lol) are fine.

Does that sound limiting? Well it isn't for me, since when I'm already done experiencing the challenge I start modding to my heart's content, but first I want to try the vanilla experience, because that's what everyone will be talking about and that's what I'm going to introduce to my friends! (and that's what the developers have tuned for the players). And that vanilla experience depends strongly on "design intent" from the developers, whatever it may be, because that's what I—and others like me—are trying to experience.

[Gurgel]

16 hours ago, KittenIsAGeek said:

Basically, what I'm saying is that when you're playing ONI, you can't really exploit anything.  You can certainly take advantage of bugs or physics to build some really fantastic devices, but none of it is an exploit until you start competing with other individuals.  At that point, you can exploit things only as they pertain to the rules of competition that you've set up.  I can enable sandbox mode.  I can edit my save file.  I can load mods.  I can abuse the physics algorithms.  None of that is an exploit because it only affects myself and my game.

Just my thoughts. And just to state it clearly: I am not competing with anybody here. If you, without my consent, believe you are competing with me, then _you_ can exploit things, but I cannot.

[DaveSatx]

On 8/4/2019 at 8:54 PM, Miravlix said:

We have a community, we are not playing in a black box with no outside communication, so it's silly to talk about "singe player", there is NO SINGLE PLAYER GAMES due to the internet.

You are lying to yourself if you post here and claim it's a single player game. The FACT that you posted makes it a community.

nah bro.  i don't give a f** what the internet thinks. its single player because no one else is playing at the same time as me in my particular world. yeah.

just checked, yeah, that's what single player means. lol.

 

don't conflate internet interest groups and youtube channels with being equivalent to multiplayer games, mmo etc.. completely illogical.

[DrSugarFreeman]

@Pentalis Oh stop it, you flatter me.