As Klei could very easily implement a difficult mode (without distorting the gaming experience through intensive modification of the world generation)

[MondayNight]

From my knowledge the basic premise of DS at its core was "trial and error". That alone. No info at all, like one would be dropped in wilderness irl: survive to the best of your deductive abilities - thus no tutorial. Or die. Die 1000 times and more (remember "1.000.000 dead Wilsons"?). From there it came the "uncompromising survival wilderness" aspect. And, I repeat, just that. Rest was a so-and-so classic narrative thread, the story around which your adventure exhaled. You had the Sandbox World in which you learned via trying and dying. And when you considered you're ready, the Adventure Mode. At its end - a conclusion. Le fin. Yes, you mostly are correct in your assessment of current DST, @Crimson Chin and @Sketched_Philo: beyond those DS points in multiplayer you only have Sandbox and optional bosses. No Adventure Mode to have an ultimate goal, no epic obligatory battle to conquer the world for an epilogue. A perpetual limbo... that doesn't go beyond initial premise of those 4 static seasons with a final 10-dogs-cap per player on randomized periodical attacks. And yes, there is where developing direction hit a wall, hiccupped and only filled the void with optional, aesthetic stuff.

Us veterans, that stuck with the game, found other creative ways to overcome this problem. I suppose is from person to person, preferences and how we entertain ourselves with given tools. I for one still am entertained - by other players in pubs. Seeing them, what they do, how they do it, the chat, etc while also enacting my standard mojo for duration of that respective Survival pub run: usually Ruins rush, mush a boss or 2, teleporting animals in communal base etc. Imagination is the limit. From time to time I hop on some dedicated Endless servers as well and usually make hidden base models that I print-screen after I do pretty much everything one can do in DST. But i concur: if my only goal would be fighting, and/or "hardcore" surviving.. I would be long gone. (And yes, always I nomad first 2-3 seasons, and usually camp in deep Ruins, at Labyrinth's entrance, Main Ancient Pseudostation extension loop, Cave Swamp, Moon Island or make a Boats Base)

Much to write about, yet for now... will wait Wurt's update for some quality mermy time, heh.

 

PS: I also learned the game via "trial and error", being way too lazy to read pages upon pages of what basically is random fantasy i don't bother with on principle. And the last sweet bits of "hidden knowledge" (advanced farms, exploits, bugs etc) I got from discussions on pubs (Dedicated ones mostly, where advanced players "dwell") or... these forums *thumbs-up*

[Rosten]

11 hours ago, Sketched_Philo said:

Imagine how many more it'd have with a different philosophy...

 

Imagine how many more player the niche cult classic indie game would have if it just abandoned it's core ethos that made the people who enjoy it like it in the first place. Why don't we turn CS:Go into a party game and Mario Party into a competitive shooter while we're at it?

[Crimson Chin]

1 hour ago, Rosten said:

Imagine how many more player the niche cult classic indie game would have if it just abandoned it's core ethos that made the people who enjoy it like it in the first place. Why don't we turn CS:Go into a party game and Mario Party into a competitive shooter while we're at it?

Are you REALLY trying to say that niche indie games can't turn into a huge success? And who on Earth are you to say why people enjoyed DST, or any game for that matter, for Pete's sake someone could play DST because they like the way the rocks look.. I know I didn't stick around because of the "engaging" gameplay, no I stuck around because of DST's aesthetics and my friends. You seemingly want the game to just... end once you know everything, like it does now, and thats silly for a game meant to be played endlessly.

There.... are reasons why Minecraft, Terraria, and much more once tiny indie games became massively successful..... And besides, weren't you arguing on other threads that DST DID change everything about the series and forgot its roots? While I somewhat agree with that, saying that and then this comes off as hypocritical.

 

[56933043043]

1 hour ago, Rosten said:

Imagine how many more player the niche cult classic indie game would have if it just abandoned it's core ethos that made the people who enjoy it like it in the first place. Why don't we turn CS:Go into a party game and Mario Party into a competitive shooter while we're at it?

You used the quantity of positive reviews to argue for something in an earlier post, right? If we're going by that, then yes, let's have DST abandon the core ethos that has been holding it back all this time and be more like games that get more positive reviews. You could also justify plenty of those reviews with the art style, music design, and lore behind the game, not the game design. Your comparison of two games that are already much more successful doesn't really work to prove your point, I'm sad to say.

I think that most people who came to DST saw the art style and atmosphere and came for it, not the game design. Have you ever seen it advertised in the store page how good DST's "progression" is? It's emphasis on "trial and error" gameplay? Is how the game plays in this way ever advertised on the store page?

Not gonna lie I felt a bit...brand twitter reading that....but...just for verification.

[Rosten]

This thread is honestly just ridiculous. I feel like I'm arguing with a bunch of people on the matter of whether or not the sky is blue. 

But I mean, what do I know? I've only been an active participant in Don't Starve's community for six years, and a lurker for longer than that. After all, it's really just silly to think that somebody who had a hand in shaping Don't Starve's development with the rest of it's original community would know anything about the game's design ethos. Surely, the people who only started playing when DST got popular would know better, silly me. 

[Jessie_]

1 minute ago, Rosten said:

I've only been an active participant in Don't Starve's community for six years, and a lurker for longer than that. After all, it's really just silly to think that somebody who had a hand in shaping Don't Starve's development with the rest of it's original community would know anything about the game's design ethos. Surely, the people who only started playing when DST got popular would know better, silly me. 

your opinion doesn't become magically more valuable than others' just because you spent more time in the community, in my opinion

[Rosten]

2 minutes ago, JessieBretworth said:

your opinion doesn't become magically more valuable than others' just because you spent more time in the community, in my opinion

 I respect this point of view, but also

[Jessie_]

doubling down, i see

[Rosten]

Is this the part where you dramatically pull off your cowl, revealing that you were actually Lord Battal all along? I wouldn't even be mad, honestly.

[56933043043]

32 minutes ago, Rosten said:

This thread is honestly just ridiculous. I feel like I'm arguing with a bunch of people on the matter of whether or not the sky is blue. 

But I mean, what do I know? I've only been an active participant in Don't Starve's community for six years, and a lurker for longer than that. After all, it's really just silly to think that somebody who had a hand in shaping Don't Starve's development with the rest of it's original community would know anything about the game's design ethos. Surely, the people who only started playing when DST got popular would know better, silly me. 

I don't appreciate people saying that x time spent in x community makes them more truthful/valid in the community than other people thank you

[Crimson Chin]

38 minutes ago, Rosten said:

This thread is honestly just ridiculous. I feel like I'm arguing with a bunch of people on the matter of whether or not the sky is blue. 

But I mean, what do I know? I've only been an active participant in Don't Starve's community for six years, and a lurker for longer than that. After all, it's really just silly to think that somebody who had a hand in shaping Don't Starve's development with the rest of it's original community would know anything about the game's design ethos. Surely, the people who only started playing when DST got popular would know better, silly me. 

You did a really nice job there dodging everything we just said and going full elitist. You have no idea who we are and how long we have been part of the community. Either way, everyone's opinion should be valued, no matter their play time! ..... even yours. Now if you want to actually reply to the points made, go for it and we can continue this discussion.

[Rosten]

21 minutes ago, Crimson Chin said:

You did a really nice job there dodging everything we just said and going full elitist. You have no idea who we are and how long we have been part of the community. Either way, everyone's opinion should be valued, no matter their play time! ..... even yours. Now if you want to actually reply to the points made, go for it and we can continue this discussion.

 

27 minutes ago, Sketched_Philo said:

I don't appreciate people saying that x time spent in x community makes them more truthful/valid in the community than other people thank you

I would say when it comes to such topics as "Knowing the design ethos under which most game decisions were made in a game that was actively developed alongside and heavily influenced by the ideas and contributions of an involved community" seniority is a pretty meaningful indicator of whether or not you know what you're talking about. 

So far the arguments presented were:

"I don't like the game, I just like how it looks. So it should change to fit my preferences."

and

"Well the exact thing you mentioned isn't mentioned word-for-word in the game's Steam blurb so clearly it wasn't a consideration at all."

Like, it's great that you love the aesthetic, I do too. That doesn't give you the right to wander in and demand that Klei alter the core concept of a near-decade in the making game to fit your particular preference instead of that of the thousands of people who'd contributed their ideas, time, and money into the game since it's inception.

[Crimson Chin]

1 hour ago, Rosten said:

 

I would say when it comes to such topics as "Knowing the design ethos under which most game decisions were made in a game that was actively developed alongside and heavily influenced by the ideas and contributions of an involved community" seniority is a pretty meaningful indicator of whether or not you know what you're talking about. 

So far the arguments presented were:

"I don't like the game, I just like how it looks. So it should change to fit my preferences."

and

"Well the exact thing you mentioned isn't mentioned word-for-word in the game's Steam blurb so clearly it wasn't a consideration at all."

Like, it's great that you love the aesthetic, I do too. That doesn't give you the right to wander in and demand that Klei alter the core concept of a near-decade in the making game to fit your particular preference instead of that of the thousands of people who'd contributed their ideas, time, and money into the game since it's inception.

You seem to be majorly simplifying our arguments. We can say the same about you with "I like how the game is now so I don't want it to change at all". Please actually reply to the points made rather than doing that. Its also still really funny to me how I have seen you on multiple threads complaining about how DST has lost its roots and what DS had. I could tell you the same thing you said to us, "If you don't like it get lost". This isn't fair.

I also hope you realize how much of an elitist you sound like right now. Its true someone who has been through the life of DS/DST is going to have a valuable opinion, but I'd argue the opinion of a new player could just be as valuable. I don't care at all how long you have been playing, I only care about what you have to say and.. if I disagree.. I disagree. You really ought to get off your high horse and start showing some more respect to everyone and their opinions. This absolutely should not have to be said, but everyone's opinion has some value to it, no matter how much you have played. 

[fimmatek]

Guys, keep it civil please. You're getting really off-topic and making a flamewar instead of actual discussion here. Just agree to disagree and move on. 

The last 1,5 page is literally just comments saying that "The game should be how the players like it" or "Players should like the game how it is". 

I personally tend to agree with the latter more, but that doesn't mean the game shouldn't change at all.

Btw, on topic of played hours: in my opinion not the time spent in the game should matter the most, rather the arguments and reasons. A stupid idea won't be any better if said by a pro and a great idea is also not less worthy if it's from a newcomer. Address the arguments and reasons, not the hours.

[Desblat]

On 14.10.2019 at 9:57 AM, Pop Guy said:

Thanks Canis, but after the failure of my idea of the nameless island I moved away from the project. I have the feeling of not being what you are looking for

What kind of failure?

[Frashaw27]

17 minutes ago, Desblat said:

What kind of failure?

It didn't or isn't going to be implmented because the massive size of the idea.

[Rosten]

3 hours ago, Crimson Chin said:

You seem to be majorly simplifying our arguments. We can say the same about you with "I like how the game is now so I don't want it to change at all". Please actually reply to the points made rather than doing that. Its also still really funny to me how I have seen you on multiple threads complaining about how DST has lost its roots and what DS had. I could tell you the same thing you said to us, "If you don't like it get lost". This isn't fair.

I also hope you realize how much of an elitist you sound like right now. Its true someone who has been through the life of DS/DST is going to have a valuable opinion, but I'd argue the opinion of a new player could just be as valuable. I don't care at all how long you have been playing, I only care about what you have to say and.. if I disagree.. I disagree. You really ought to get off your high horse and start showing some more respect to everyone and their opinions. This absolutely should not have to be said, but everyone's opinion has some value to it, no matter how much you have played. 

I'm not simplifying your argument, that is *literally* what you are saying. Both of you have said that you don't care for the game, just the aesthetics. Stop trying to come in here and take away DS, the unique survival roguelike,from the people who spent years of their lives helping it grow into what it is just because you want to look at the pretty art and ignore the rest of what makes the game what it is.

[Crimson Chin]

28 minutes ago, Rosten said:

I'm not simplifying your argument, that is *literally* what you are saying. Both of you have said that you don't care for the game, just the aesthetics. Stop trying to come in here and take away DS, the unique survival roguelike,from the people who spent years of their lives helping it grow into what it is just because you want to look at the pretty art and ignore the rest of what makes the game what it is.

Where did I ever say that I don't care about the game? Quite obviously I do, otherwise I wouldn't be here on the forums. I love DS and DST, and I obviously enjoyed the games enough to stick around this long. Its unfair of you to assume that everyone here is still here just because of the gameplay, that is 100 percent false. Sketched is absolutely correct in saying that a good chunk of DST's positive reviews are thanks to its aesthetics. I'm still not sure why you are saying these things when you yourself don't like the current road the game was taking. People have reasons to play games, stop trying to be the judge of whats a good one or not. I'd argue asthetics are the 2nd most important part about a game after gameplay! Its what draws people in and if they like how the game plays too, they will stay! Thats the problem, DST fails to keep players engaged after playing for a while. I dont know what suggestions here are destroying your idea of a perfect DST, but DST is as easy as its ever been, we are asking for content that is engaging... and would probably in return be more challenging.

Anyways, I have a question, what do YOU want DST to be. I'm saying your idea is flawed because DST is a mutliplayer game that has the intention to keep you playing long as possible, but your idea destroys its replayablity. The system is fundamentally flawed if the goal is to keep players playing when you need to be blind to get much enjoyment out of it. As pointed out reading the wiki completely destroys what it has, and what it has wears off after a few playthroughs. Other games encourage exploration and discovery just as much as DST does and you can't simply read the wiki to ruin that entire experience. 

[BeanBagSonic]

11 hours ago, Rosten said:

 I respect this point of view, but also

It's no wonder I hadn't joined the Klei forums until long after I had first played Don't Starve (back when there was a promo for it in Team Fortress 2), and even years later I was hesitant to join. Coming back after a long break from the forums, it's a shame to still see that the primary response to requesting change in Don't Starve/Together is "Go play another game." right beside "If you don't like it, mod it." 

No one should scrutinize anyone simply for how old or how young their forum account is, or even how new or old the players are themselves, as every critique is valuable. They are the stepping stones set for games to guide themselves in the right direction.

5 hours ago, Rosten said:

I'm not simplifying your argument, that is *literally* what you are saying. Both of you have said that you don't care for the game, just the aesthetics. Stop trying to come in here and take away DS, the unique survival roguelike,from the people who spent years of their lives helping it grow into what it is just because you want to look at the pretty art and ignore the rest of what makes the game what it is.

No one here is in here to "take away DS," as if it only belongs to you or select others. DS/T belongs to everyone, as it is a product that was made for the public, and will rightly have its criticisms.

In case I'm also too new of a forumer for your Senior ears, here's a PM from JoeW in regards to the value of Junior and Senior Member titles. Take notes @x0VERSUS1y @Rosten, and @Jessie223 I'm sorry that your first few hours in the Klei forums was a circus full of Senior clowns practicing their comedy routine on you.

[Rosten]

Imagine calling someone a Senior clown when you spent a non-zero amount of time going through a bunch of my posts and reacting with "Confused" to them.

Like, dude.

Get a life, lmao.

[BeanBagSonic]

11 minutes ago, Rosten said:

Imagine calling someone a Senior clown when you spent a non-zero amount of time going through a bunch of my posts and reacting with "Confused" to them.

Like, dude.

Get a life, lmao.

I read posts, and I react accordingly. I like to know what I'm responding to before I make a response.

Here I am now telling a Senior member how to use the Klei forums, and any forum for that matter. Next time, please respond to the points I address rather than resorting to ad hominem. Thank you.

[Rosten]

11 minutes ago, BeanBagSonic said:

I read posts, and I react accordingly. I like to know what I'm responding to before I make a response.

Here I am now telling a Senior member how to use the Klei forums, and any forum for that matter. Next time, please respond to the points I address rather than resorting to ad hominem. Thank you.

Why would I bother? Your points are garbage, and your argumentative strategy is "Restate things because surely if I just say a thing more times it'll make it truer." 

Plus you're taking up this hilariously high and mighty attitude while saying literally nothing of value and demanding that people debate points that they've either already responded to several times over or are absolute nonsense based on literally nothing other than "I think it's true so it must be."

If you did actually read what I was saying, then I'd really love to know why you're asking me to say it again. 

[Illumina]

23 minutes ago, Rosten said:

Why would I bother? Your points are garbage, and your argumentative strategy is "Restate things because surely if I just say a thing more times it'll make it truer." 

Plus you're taking up this hilariously high and mighty attitude while saying literally nothing of value and demanding that people debate points that they've either already responded to several times over or are absolute nonsense based on literally nothing other than "I think it's true so it must be."

If you did actually read what I was saying, then I'd really love to know why you're asking me to say it again. 

What you are saying is a fallacy, just by the fact you think your opinion matters the most because "You have more time in the forums than everyone else". All your comments have been a fallacious reasoning, you are basically appealing to the elites to prove a point, and that's incorrect, i suggest you to use a more valid argument, You may have said "Plus you're taking up this hilariously high and mighty attitude while saying literally nothing of value and demanding that people debate points that they've either already responded to several times over or are absolute nonsense based on literally nothing other than "I think it's true so it must be.", and that's pure hipocrisy, because you are using the time of the forums as something to prove your argument even though that doesn't has nothing of value. BUT SERIOUSLY, CAN WE JUST COME BACK TO THE TOPIC OF THIS DISCUSSION, YOU KNOW, "Make the game harder"?

TLDR: All you're saying is a fallacy, and you shouldn't use the time of the forums as a valid point, please, lets just go back to the Topic, this is going very Off-topic. 

 

[Rosten]

38 minutes ago, Ismael Marin said:

What you are saying is a fallacy, just by the fact you think your opinion matters the most because "You have more time in the forums than everyone else". All your comments have been a fallacious reasoning, you are basically appealing to the elites to prove a point, and that's incorrect, i suggest you to use a more valid argument, You may have said "Plus you're taking up this hilariously high and mighty attitude while saying literally nothing of value and demanding that people debate points that they've either already responded to several times over or are absolute nonsense based on literally nothing other than "I think it's true so it must be.", and that's pure hipocrisy, because you are using the time of the forums as something to prove your argument even though that doesn't has nothing of value. BUT SERIOUSLY, CAN WE JUST COME BACK TO THE TOPIC OF THIS DISCUSSION, YOU KNOW, "Make the game harder"?

TLDR: All you're saying is a fallacy, and you shouldn't use the time of the forums as a valid point, please, lets just go back to the Topic, this is going very Off-topic. 

 

Let me say this in big bold text so you can't miss it.

I never said that being a newer player makes your opinion on the direction the game should go in the future lesser or invalid.

What I said was that in terms of the argument of "What were the design ethos under which Don't Starve was originally developed" that people who were there while it was being developed would know more than people who downloaded Don't Starve Together a few months ago.

Whether or not Don't Starve's original design ethos are relevant anymore or a good idea is a conversation which I am perfectly open to the opinions of newer players, hell, they're the ones who'll be playing it same as me after all.

I would maybe even argue that in order for the game to flourish, some ideals are going to have to be abandoned. Currently, Don't Starve Together is in this weird, conflicting mish-mash state where half of the game's mechanics are totally at odds with each other. For a very basic example; the core game's mechanics were designed around having one life, and as a result, failure is either almost always result of a player's deliberate actions (I.e. Fighting a treeguard and failing to kite it properly.) or a result of inaction in the face of a timed threat (I.e. The Giants or Hounds)

At the moment, these elements of the game exist in half-states throughout. Death is *kind of* meaningful. Timed threats are *kind of* threatening. 

The problem is that this half-state of everything caters to nobody. People who enjoy the social, aesthetic and base-building aspects of the game are totally at odds with the timed challenges and bosses who wreck your base if you aren't attentive enough. People who enjoy the challenging, uncompromising survival aspect of the game are at odds with the game's laxer pace, lack of meaningful incentives for progression (I.e. There's no pressure to prepare for the Dragonfly, which is a pretty big deal on most player's first season in DS.) and the relative meaninglessness of death compared to the original. The various options for how death works are a pretty clear indicator of this. Klei is trying to sort-of cater to two completely different audiences and the game feels totally split down the middle and neither are totally happy with it. I don't know how new players feel about this, it's possible that they accept the game in it's current state fully due to not really having had the context of the original game and how it was made, but threads like this make me feel like there's a clear bent towards "Most people aren't happy with a fair few aspects of the game, and a lot of those desires are irreconcilable with others." 

What I'd really appreciate if Klei would either properly split development on DST, the base-building quirky party "survival" game, and DST, the uncompromising wilderness survival game where any cockily poorly planned outing could mean the end of your run, or just declare that one of those was the focus and abandon the other so fans who enjoy that aspect of the game can stop being teased by the half measures Klei implements to appease both sides.

 

[JoeW]

Please keep things on topic and without personal attacks. Thanks