[Spaced Out! Update] - 459378

[evilcat19xx]

29 minutes ago, goboking said:

Like The Witcher 3.  Like God of War.  Like Horizon Zero Dawn and Red Dead Redemption and Shadows Die Twice.  Like Breath of the Wild.  Like Death Stranding. 

:>>>>>

1 hour ago, evilcat19xx said:

First of all, I did not say that all games are becoming like that. It is a slow trend which is especially true for the games that produce here in the North America

 

29 minutes ago, goboking said:

I don't know why you felt compelled to drag gender politics into the discussion

I did not. From everything I wrote, that line was the the one that you quoted.

Anyway, the gender politics example was to show the adverse effects of "vocal minorities" on gaming industry. 

29 minutes ago, goboking said:

under siege

I said "trend". I am not sure why you changed my tone and word. I brought many examples to show you the -----> trend.

Note: I won't continue this discussion, since it is out of scope of this post. 

 

Edited April 12, 2021 by evilcat19xx

[pether]

16 hours ago, babba said:

- Regular updates require fresh saves

- Bugs and crashes

- Multi colony micromanagement complaints

I can read it as:

1. Pls more updates
2. Omg, too many updates
3. Btw I have no idea how to play

[babba]

3 hours ago, pether said:

I can read it as:

1. Pls more updates
2. Omg, too many updates
3. Btw I have no idea how to play

Remember that those people have played the base game, as base game ownership is required to play the dlc game.

In the past some users had suggested that Klei should have launched the dlc as separate game, as its a completely different experience with drastic changes, that were their words + Klei communicated recently that they went a bit too far at once.

I always called the dlc the "Base game rework". Not in my wildest dreams I would have thought that day 1 of the dlc removes base game content, that was an shocking and interesting game expansion concept and experience for me.

Initial vanilla base game save destruction was a hard hit for me, I had to stop playing my thousand of cycles played great survival mode base with the day of the dlc access and start from scratch.

Hopefully the fusion is complete by winter 2021, praying. I want to start a big map at the end of the year with the Klei`s base game & dlc content fusion result and use that save game for the future onward.

Awaiting further base game & dlc game melting fusion and content re-integration...Time pill !

Edited April 12, 2021 by babba

[marioespinho]

After all this, i'm still confused with what you guys really want on the big maps. All the options i see make no sense or already exist.

A) Vanilla style A

A map with every resource on it and also having multiple geysers like the base game will render all of space pointless, since everything is on the starting asteroid. So all that is left is metaphysical trips to invisible planets to get late-game resources. This is already present in the base game, minus nuclear.

B) Vanilla style B

Same as before, but with extra clusters with the late-game resources in them. This, beyond the fact that would be a FPS killer, makes no sense, since all we would get is clusters full of stuff that we don't need since we already have them back home, only housing 1 resource or so, making space travel feel more like a chore than anything else.

C) Spaced out

Bigger map but with missing resources and less geysers. In my opinion, this only makes it so that we need to dig more in order to get to space or any of the geysers. This feels more like it hinders the early game and the process to even get to space, since we have to dig more in order to do the very exact same thing we already do now.

______________________________

Maybe i'm missing the point, but i really can't see the appeal of a big, vanilla like, asteroid with the current space mechanics. I understand the feeling the base game asteroids have, but in order to get those, we would have to make the whole space rework pointless, in wich case would make more sense to just ask for nuclear on the base game instead of bigger maps on spaced out.

[babba]

@marioespinho My input and expectations # My disappointing Terra DLC excursion # My Teleporter feedback

Gurgels short findings @Gurgel # Sasza22 input @Sasza22

---------------------

1 hour ago, marioespinho said:

...

A) ...

A map with every resource on it...

I could not find that someone stated or requested all resources in this thread, my dear friend

From my point of view oil,steel,plastic,regolith,base metal volcanos and true cold water geyser(s) should be IMHO possible/available on a ideal/easy big "Classic dlc map". Uranium would be nice so that base builder fans & beginners can early toy around with nuke stuff. In past threads I raised the wish to place a ready-to-go and fully assembled sugar rocket to the map top, so that beginners can have an early success moment and get a grip how space works - Can be seen as a space tutorial/introduction.

Advanced tech & advanced materials, fancy items, challenges, surprises and maximum-resource-gathering would be accessible via space exploration and by establishing other asteroids. My map teleporter feedback is further above linked, in short... it should be possible to switch the teleporter spawning off in the world generation settings.

From my point of view this post has a lot of key components which I would expect in a true "dlc classic experience". Things need to be made optionally possible and available to players, so that both styles can be played..."The dlc play style" and the "Base game play style". Nothing would be taken away from anyone, both play styles are complementary from my point of view, players can focus on their preferred play style or alter their style during their play and with Klei`s future offered world generation settings.

Would be nice hear what others have to say

Edited April 12, 2021 by babba

[Electroely]

2 hours ago, marioespinho said:

B) Vanilla style B

Same as before, but with extra clusters with the late-game resources in them. This, beyond the fact that would be a FPS killer, makes no sense, since all we would get is clusters full of stuff that we don't need since we already have them back home, only housing 1 resource or so, making space travel feel more like a chore than anything else.

I think that this would be the best way to do a vanilla-style cluster; The main asteroid would have all the base game biomes + the sulfur and radioactive biomes, and space travel would be mainly for the same things vanilla space travel is for; obtaining rare materials and renewing certain other materials.

Whether it's considered a chore or not seems subjective to me, but this is how I personally think a vanilla-style cluster that puts less emphasis on space travel would be. Just like the base game but with the new biomes, the new mechanics (like radiation) and the new rockets to serve about the same purpose as in vanilla.

[Gurgel]

3 hours ago, babba said:

Would be nice hear what others have to say

I am fine with oil _or_ cold water on the same map. Oil one teleporter removed is also fine. I had enough maps in the base game were I did not even get 30C water, let alone cold water.

[zach123b]

the forest start is great, much easier than any start so far imo

but it has the same trouble as the swamp start did, the pokeshells can fail to spawn.  they're not guaranteed even though i have 2 tidal biome areas

[marioespinho]

@babba @Electroely

If a starting asteroid has all that, then what point is there to even have clusters outside the main one? None, as far as i can see. If everything besides rare resources are in the main asteroid, then there is no point in having places to fly to anyway.

[babba]

8 hours ago, marioespinho said:

@babba @Electroely

If a starting asteroid has all that, then what point is there to even have clusters outside the main one? None, as far as i can see. If everything besides rare resources are in the main asteroid, then there is no point in having places to fly to anyway.

As counter one could ask the same theoretical vanilla base game question "What point is there to use rockets in the vanilla original game?", from my point of view. Did lots of people attempt or regularly fly to space to aquire resources ? I guess so

Was it fun, for those which managed to get resources in the vanilla base game via rockets, and did they make use of aquired space resources ? I guess so, for those players which managed to get in to space with rockets.

My requested resource list for "big dlc classic map`s" in this thread is copied far below ( resources highlighted in purple ), it goes up to Steel and includes basic metals ( that would be gold, iron etc. ) - Which practically allows the player to basically run equipment more or less safe with up to ~300 Celsius temperature with Steel.

The reason I have also added Uranium as suggestion is from my gut feeling as builder fan. It would allow base builders to do lots of nuke stuff in a base, as a guestimate this will only minor affect the lust to explore space exploration for the average total player audience. However, that is my opinion.

I find that your question ( according to my provided resource list ) would doubt the usefulness of rockets in the original vanilla base game. You have every right to perhaps disagree and to have a different opinion.

One must imagine that some players get stressed out if they a forced in to multi asteroid play, this is reflected by some steam dlc review comments. If one wants to explore...Then its building rockets and flying in to space to find new and better materials, to gather vast amount of resources and to build further asteroid outposts or new bases elsewhere. Its about options and not to enforce multi asteroid play stress on to every player. Once a player is more confident, has gained experience...and is in the mood to explore space...and perhaps also wants fancy items, is curious, wants great temperature materials, is keen on multi asteroid play...then you can bet for sure they will explore space and want to visit other asteroids in big dlc classic maps.

I will fly to space if Klei would follow suggestions, as rocket launches, rocket gameplay and aquiring advanced space located resources ( like Niobium , Thermium and other materials with much higher temperature resistances, materials like graphite, more lead for suits, mega tons of water/ice/algae etc. as other examples ) are the key reasons why I play the game - However, I tend to first build a mega base for the first few thousand cycles, as I`m a builder by heart.

In the initial base building phase I also do not want to be bombarded exclusively with ~100 Celsius water sources, like in Terra. Klei`s tagged "Ideal" world(s) should also have cold water sources. Also some players like that some starting map renewable resource spawns are randomized, so that searching for big map resources is more fun and exciting.

There is also lots of base game players which love to build mega monuments, a barrage of rockets, waterfalls and what not in their bases. Decoration players love to build their dreams and refine their creations in a big map, they also have expressed their disappointment with Klei constantly breaking their game saves over time and therefore Klei destroying their lovely decoration base works.

"Big Map Classic World" conditions are an option for players and will especially appeal to big base builders and big base decoration players. If you want to play as you do currently...That would be choosing your usual starter world with your usual starter world options. Nothing will be taken away from you.

I hope I could, at least perhaps a bit, convince with arguments. I would send you a crate of "lovely brewed dupe beyr" in the game, if ONi had multiplayer

19 hours ago, babba said:

@marioespinho My input and expectations # My disappointing Terra DLC excursion # My Teleporter feedback

Gurgels short findings @Gurgel # Sasza22 input @Sasza22

---------------------

I could not find that someone stated or requested all resources in this thread, my dear friend

From my point of view oil,steel,plastic,regolith,base metal volcanos and true cold water geyser(s) should be IMHO possible/available on a ideal/easy big "Classic dlc map". Uranium would be nice so that base builder fans & beginners can early toy around with nuke stuff. In past threads I raised the wish to place a ready-to-go and fully assembled sugar rocket to the map top, so that beginners can have an early success moment and get a grip how space works - Can be seen as a space tutorial/introduction.

Advanced tech & advanced materials, fancy items, challenges, surprises and maximum-resource-gathering would be accessible via space exploration and by establishing other asteroids. My map teleporter feedback is further above linked, in short... it should be possible to switch the teleporter spawning off in the world generation settings.

From my point of view this post has a lot of key components which I would expect in a true "dlc classic experience". Things need to be made optionally possible and available to players, so that both styles can be played..."The dlc play style" and the "Base game play style". Nothing would be taken away from anyone, both play styles are complementary from my point of view, players can focus on their preferred play style or alter their style during their play and with Klei`s future offered world generation settings.

Would be nice hear what others have to say

 

Edited April 13, 2021 by babba
typos

[spkthed]

I think C is the only viable path. Pre DLC mid to late game involved running the game overnight for a lot of people while gathering resources. Think about that in terms of fun - it's not. Klei needed to change this and I'm really thankful they did/are. Watch ONI streamers sometime for another datapoint here, the all just rerolled constantly. Mid to late game was *not* fun. Is it now? I think objectively it's getting there.

Spaced Out obviously isn't done but it's really clear the gameplay now is to build up, then move on, build up, then move on. Mid to late game has you doing stuff all the way through, and it all requires attention. How do you playtest those very different games to merge content? If it's not successful then we get to deal with whiners complaining about stuff being broken or too easy or too hard or whatever.

I *really* like the idea of a big empty base world - some geysers, but maybe not even metal ones. Lots of water, sulfur, chlorine, and *maybe* oil etc but for sustainability - you've gotta hop worlds. You then have room for a really big base, can get started but the gameplay loop is the same otherwise.

[Unfawkable]

To chime in as well, I'm also on the "you don't like the design, play the base game" train. Adding easy to add options for people who would prefer some more taste of the base game is fine, but please don't sink any significant dev hours into this. It's not the direction the DLC should go, and it's a waste of time and resources that could be used to ship other good content for the DLC. I hope Klei listens much more to their vision for this, and much less to "feedback" that asks for a different DLC entirely.

[Electroely]

6 hours ago, marioespinho said:

@babba @Electroely

If a starting asteroid has all that, then what point is there to even have clusters outside the main one? None, as far as i can see. If everything besides rare resources are in the main asteroid, then there is no point in having places to fly to anyway.

Isn't that the point of a vanilla-style cluster? The radiation stuff is a large part of the DLC, and the other new biomes can be fun new additions. Such a vanilla-style cluster would mainly exist for those who don't want to deal with the multi-planet gameplay while still enjoying the rest of the content Spaced Out offers.

While, yeah, Spaced Out's selling point is largely the space exploration aspect (it says it in the name!) I think Klei's trying to appeal to those who enjoy the base game loop and want to enjoy the new additions in this DLC, which seems like a pretty fair request to me.

[babba]

Simplification example:

The Vanilla Base game is Coca Cola = Overwhelmingly positive rating of ONI on Steam.

The current DLC condition is Cherry Coke = Mostly positive rating of ONI DLC on Steam.

If Coca Cola would only run the Cherry Coke brand, I find that would be targeting only a fraction of the entire possible audience. Anyways, I have stated for myself what the problems are from my point of view and have ( for now ) nothing more to add about the dlc situation. I will leave Klei now time to deliver, its their game.

BTW I love Cherry Coke

Edited April 13, 2021 by babba

[marioespinho]

@babba

Vanilla had "invisible" planets. All you needed to do was send a rocket up and wait for it to come back with stuff. Now you have fully rendered landable planets, that, if we have what you ask for, will just be full of stuff you already have, apart from the rare materials. So you would be doing the same that you do in vanilla, except with extra, pointless, steps. Why one would choose this new method as opposing to the vanilla one?

@Electroely

Then i think it would make far more sense to simply request nuclear, critters, etc to be added to the base game for DLC owners, instead of a whole DLC adaptation of the base game. Even if you have a big asteroid, you will still need to deal with space travel and multi-asteroid management once you do go out to those planets, because space will still need to be tackel the same way. The only difference is that other planets will just be playable for no reason at all, wich is even a bad thing if we think how lag builds up with each extra planet we have to deal with.

I understand what you are asking, but i think it would be far simpler to just add the new stuff to the base game instead of trying to adapt the "new game" to feel like the "old" one.

[pether]

29 minutes ago, marioespinho said:

Then i think it would make far more sense to simply request nuclear, critters, etc to be added to the base game for DLC owners, instead of a whole DLC adaptation of the base game.

Hey, thats a good idea! Makes things so much cleaner. Why I never thought of that...?

[kerosene]

I want to give one good reason against teleporters.

Rockets and space in the base game were too difficult, mainly because players had to suddenly deal with new and harsh mechanics and poorly documented features. Had these features been introduced more gradually to players, with increasing complexity and difficulty and better documentation it would have worked out much better. There were the heavy machinery mechanic, the vision cone of scanners and telescopes, how to transfer heat away from robo miners in space and other similar things. It wasn't explained how these things worked and they are difficult or tedious to work out for myself.

Rockets and space were also not well integrated into the rest of the game so there wasn't much of a reason to go to space other than to achieve the win condition. But winning isn't really the point of the game.

So what we need is an earlier introduction of rockets, with more forgiving mechanics. Teleporters are a way to visit another asteroid that lets you avoid rockets but one of the goals of this DLC should be for players to no longer avoid rockets. If early rockets are too difficult, then solution should not be to add teleporters as a sort of crutch but to make the first rocket easier to use, and the first asteroid easy to land on, and to make sure that rockets can properly function as transport vehicles between asteroids. Later rockets and destinations can always be more challenging.

Basically, teleporters to me seem like the developers saying "we can't make rockets work properly, so let's add teleporters to reduce the player's reliance on rockets". Yet I simply want rockets to work properly, and the game be designed around them. If you removed teleporters, it would more clearly expose any problems with the current rockets.

Edited April 13, 2021 by kerosene

[sakura_sk]

1 hour ago, kerosene said:

Basically, teleporters to me seem like the developers saying "we can't make rockets work properly, so let's add teleporters to reduce the player's reliance on rockets".

I don't think teleporters were introduced just as another way to visit that asteroid, but also as an introduction to "start over" colony mechanics that wasn't a thing before. They offer a way to build a new base quickly, having an easy way out, without the threat of suffocation in one cycle.

I don't think that making impossible to transfer water for oil wells any other way except rocket cargo, would make rockets better or more appealing. Rockets need to work properly either way, teleporter or not being present, but rockets being the only means to oil and plastic doesn't seem better.

[Electroely]

4 hours ago, marioespinho said:

Then i think it would make far more sense to simply request nuclear, critters, etc to be added to the base game for DLC owners, instead of a whole DLC adaptation of the base game. Even if you have a big asteroid, you will still need to deal with space travel and multi-asteroid management once you do go out to those planets, because space will still need to be tackel the same way. The only difference is that other planets will just be playable for no reason at all, wich is even a bad thing if we think how lag builds up with each extra planet we have to deal with.

I understand what you are asking, but i think it would be far simpler to just add the new stuff to the base game instead of trying to adapt the "new game" to feel like the "old" one.

If Klei would be willing to add the new content to the base game, then that'd be great! But I assume that by paying the $12.99 cost for Spaced Out (which is going to get higher according to the store page), you're paying for all the content that was made for it, not just the rocketry system. It'd make the price point of the DLC seem far less appealing since it basically just takes content you already have access to and splits it into multiple planets.

I haven't had to really treat the rare resource asteroids as different colonies - Each one just had a challenge to overcome so I can set up the infrastructure for harvesting that rare resource. I imagine this wouldn't hinder players' experience too much and would leave a bit of Spaced Out's rocketry content and mechanics to be explored - since it's just rocket trips to maybe deliver x resource and bring back y resource. I'm not sure about lag, as far as that goes, because it seems like it'd have about as much lag as regular Spaced Out if the missing planets are taken into account. The game could use optimization updates in general, though. It started to lag pretty badly late-game.

I personally just suggested this idea because it in itself seems really simple - it would just be adding the new stuff to the base game worldgen and adding a few planets to the Starmap which have already been created for Spaced Out.

[pether]

6 minutes ago, Electroely said:

If Klei would be willing to add the new content to the base game, then that'd be great! But I assume that by paying the $12.99 cost for Spaced Out (which is going to get higher according to the store page), you're paying for all the content that was made for it, not just the rocketry system.

Yeah, you are right, but the idea is to grant new content in vanilla only for people who have (and paid for) the DLC.

[goboking]

7 hours ago, marioespinho said:

Why one would choose this new method as opposing to the vanilla one?

The answer to this is simpler than you're making it out to be, and it's an answer that applies to questions about many aspects of the game.

Why build a complicated petroleum boiler when you can use the oil refinery instead?  Why build a climate controlled-sleet wheat farm when a hatch ranch already feeds your colony?  Why bother with high-end art when dupe morale is high?  Why send vanilla rockets into space when resources on the asteroid can sustain a colony indefinitely?

The answer to these and many other questions is "because we can, because it's fun to do so, and because the challenge of doing so appeals to us."

[Gurgel]

2 hours ago, goboking said:

The answer to these and many other questions is "because we can, because it's fun to do so, and because the challenge of doing so appeals to us."

Very much so. The whole "story" of ONI is in the player's head, after all. Well, there are some tiny story-fragments, but they are more like teasers than a real story. There is not even any hard goal besides not letting your colony die. All entirely fine by me, but it is something to realize and understand.

[marioespinho]

6 hours ago, Electroely said:

If Klei would be willing to add the new content to the base game, then that'd be great! But I assume that by paying the $12.99 cost for Spaced Out (which is going to get higher according to the store page), you're paying for all the content that was made for it, not just the rocketry system. It'd make the price point of the DLC seem far less appealing since it basically just takes content you already have access to and splits it into multiple planets.

I meant that those things would only be available to whoever purchased the DLC. But anyway, i don't remember any game that has a game changing DLC, to have some sort of way to let players choose what to add or not to the base game. Usually you either buy it and accept what it brings, or you don't buy it.

With that being said, what would solve every issue that has been brought up would be a DST-like world generation menu, where everyone could choose what they wanted or not. But i have no idea if that would even be possible without re-writing the whole thing.

6 hours ago, Electroely said:

I'm not sure about lag, as far as that goes, because it seems like it'd have about as much lag as regular Spaced Out if the missing planets are taken into account. The game could use optimization updates in general, though. It started to lag pretty badly late-game.

It lags already when you get past half of the asteroids. I think that one of the reasons Klei decided to divide them was exactly for performance issues. If you add a big map instead of the smaller one we have, then i assume it will start to lag much sooner, since it's even the main asteroid that gets bigger, theu the one where you spend the most time in.

3 hours ago, goboking said:

The answer to this is simpler than you're making it out to be, and it's an answer that applies to questions about many aspects of the game.

Why build a complicated petroleum boiler when you can use the oil refinery instead?  Why build a climate controlled-sleet wheat farm when a hatch ranch already feeds your colony?  Why bother with high-end art when dupe morale is high?  Why send vanilla rockets into space when resources on the asteroid can sustain a colony indefinitely?

The answer to these and many other questions is "because we can, because it's fun to do so, and because the challenge of doing so appeals to us."

well , not really.

We build a petroleum boiler because refinery isn't 1:1 and we build sleet wheat farms because higher tier food gives more morale. Sure you have things like sour gas boilers and rockets, that we build mostly because there isn't really much to do lategame, but that isn't even the issue.

If the whole thing about the bigger map is because people don't like the space travelling/management or the multi-asteroid swapping, then they wouldn't send rockets out "because they can, because it's fun to do so, and because the challenge of doing so appeals to them". They would send them just because they need the stuff ( wich doesn't really apply, because if you have everything you need on the main one, then you don't need to send them out ), or because they can do it ( wich i guess they would skip, since they don't like space in the DLC ).

So why would someone play Spaced Out, even on a bigger map, since they will eventually have to deal with space travelling or multi-asteroid sooner or later, unless they don't want endgame stuff, as opposing to play on the base game and skip all that?

[goboking]

2 hours ago, marioespinho said:

If the whole thing about the bigger map is because people don't like the space travelling/management or the multi-asteroid swapping, then they wouldn't send rockets out "because they can, because it's fun to do so, and because the challenge of doing so appeals to them". They would send them just because they need the stuff ( wich doesn't really apply, because if you have everything you need on the main one, then you don't need to send them out ), or because they can do it ( wich i guess they would skip, since they don't like space in the DLC ).

I can only speak for myself, but I prefer Spaced Out's approach to space travel and have zero qualms about managing multiple outposts  across many asteroids.  But I still want a large starting asteroid because Spaced Out's smaller starting asteroid and new indestructible POIs don't leave me room to build the kinds of colonies I want to build and the smaller size removes a lot of the joy I get from early-game exploration.

[marioespinho]

13 hours ago, goboking said:

I can only speak for myself, but I prefer Spaced Out's approach to space travel and have zero qualms about managing multiple outposts  across many asteroids.  But I still want a large starting asteroid because Spaced Out's smaller starting asteroid and new indestructible POIs don't leave me room to build the kinds of colonies I want to build and the smaller size removes a lot of the joy I get from early-game exploration.

That i won't argue against. It's a valid point.