True Randomness In The Game Is Not Fun

[goatt]

@ArubaroBeefalo You have completely missed point. I can survive and manage my game very well without any of those items. I can adapt very well. But it won’t help me feel better when I farmed glommer for more 5 to 6 seasons without any fruit, which means I was religiously doing it and couldn’t do anything that takes more than 3 quarter days such as any boss fights, because I had to travel to the statues and kill every night. Normally I should’ve got it at 2 season mark, more or less. It was the belief that I can get it and the game is fair that pushed me doing it every night. This belief was tested again and again by RNG and brought me enormous amount of disappointment. (The fairness of RNG isn't broken, but the fairness of effort vs reward was).

Why did I not try other method? But why should I? Statistically speaking, any day past 100 Krampus means my odds are much higher.

But statistical truth doesn’t matter. It was luck that matters. Bad luck and the bad experience it brings is the main topic here. How to deal with it from dev side is the main topic here. Not how to adapt to the game or how to handle/ work around it as a player. It shouldn’t be something that needs workaround. Reasonable bad luck is reasonable. I didn’t complain when I killed 200 krampi, I laughed and shrugged it off. But anything beyond 300 is increasingly detrimental mentally to me to the point that I made a post about it. That is my subjective experience this op was based on.

For the record, I’m not complaining for the loot I couldn't get. I’m complaining cuz the game made me need a mental health day despite I flourish in the game. I'm discussing the impact of bad luck and the perception of fairness in game play.

Your comment was the most popular one, so i decided to give a proper response.

1 hour ago, axxel said:

So, what is the exact problem?

See my comment above.

[jan Mele]

10 minutes ago, DeadWhereX said:

Sorry, I don't understand this part. English is not my main lenguage.

Claus would need to fully heal after becoming enraged to balance(?) your suggestion, which Cheggf doesn't like.

[goatt]

2 hours ago, Lumine04 said:

Well I hope you never touch an mmorpg.

mmorpg has a different reward system. They usually have many high end players who buys ridiculously good gears with cash, and use them to encourage players to spend money and discourage players to rely on extremely low drop rate.

The rare loot is mostly accessible through boss fights, which creates an illusion that those rare items are more accessible than they actually are, in order encourage players to grind.

Bringing mmorpg and this game to comparison is unreasonably and misleading.

Plus, your argument has missed my main and only point.

[SapoLover]

20 minutes ago, jan Mele said:

Claus would need to fully heal after becoming enraged to balance(?) your suggestion, which Cheggf doesn't like.

Oh, thank you. 

1 hour ago, Cheggf said:

You are not supposed to fight enraged Klaus. And I'm pretty sure he doesn't heal when he enraged so you'd need to make him start doing that, screwing with the fight just so 0 people can use it to get the most overrated item in the game. 

The reason why nobody kills enraged Klaus (Unless you want to challenge yourself) is beacuse there isn't an extra reward for killing him. I don't see why Klaus healing after he becomes enraged would be a problem. If you kill one deer when Klaus is with 1 hp, that doesn't count as a challenge, and still no extra reward. 

11 hours ago, ArubaroBeefalo said:

Is more like a trophy than something you must have.

A trophy for being lucky?

11 hours ago, ArubaroBeefalo said:

again, adapt. No having a tam isnt blocking any kind of content, isnt needed

But he still got just one tusk (And this time it is one of the most useful items assuming that you'll make a walking cane). It would be awkward to play with 4 friends and just get one, having to roll the dice if the one who got it doesn't want to keep it. It's even worse when you think this could happen several winters.

[Cr4zyFl4mes]

Honestly i see both sides of this. And personally i wouldn't mind finding a compromise or striking the right balance for this.

• Having only one mctusk on full pub and bad luck for tusks really sucks. Walking cane is powerful and while helpful, is not neccessary for survival, but you can experience 1.2x the amount of game if you have it basically. I know there are other options how to get it like sunken chests and AG, but that still can't satisfy most people on the server. But it also keeps Wandas from making too many teleporters too soon.
• Krampus sack is more like the badge of good luck. But i understand how bad the bad luck can get and it really doesn't feel good. But yeah, you don't have to grind for it - you're only making yourself suffer. This item is not really neccessary, so i don't mind for either option.
• As for the other examples, as some other people sad, those drops don't really offer nothing new or special. You can fertilize your bushes, can use normal saddle, domesticate your beef in other ways than with the brush, use different winter clothings or use different instrument to farm. The only gated things are aesthetic (like ewelet and pumpkin pie) or mild improvements over other options in this game (like beefalo hat or war saddle)

But as I said, i wouldn't mind either way. And i like this topic.

[Lumine04]

1 hour ago, goatt said:

mmorpg has a different reward system. They usually have many high end players who buys ridiculously good gears with cash, and use them to encourage players to spend money and discourage players to rely on extremely low drop rate.

The rare loot is mostly accessible through boss fights, which creates an illusion that those rare items are more accessible than they actually are, in order encourage players to grind.

Bringing mmorpg and this game to comparison is unreasonably and misleading.

Plus, your argument has missed my main and only point.

I-it was a joke...why so mean...

I swear Im this close to using tone indicators. I thought they were silly but here I am. 

[goatt]

2 minutes ago, Lumine04 said:

I-it was a joke...why so mean...

Sorry... I'm not good at picking up cues. Not the first time xD. Is it too late to laugh at your jokes? Hehe...

[Cheggf]

2 hours ago, DeadWhereX said:

The reason why nobody kills enraged Klaus (Unless you want to challenge yourself) is beacuse

You are not supposed to. It is because you are not supposed to. If you were meant to fight him then it would be like misery where BEFORE starting the fight you would enable it, then it gives extra rewards. But neither of those are the case because enraged Klaus is a punishment. You are not supposed to kill the gem deer and remove the fight's main mechanic, and if you do, then you get punished with a much harder fight.

Asking to be rewarded for fighting enraged Klaus makes as much sense as asking to be rewarded for letting the gem deer headbutt you to death. 

[Guille6785]

wouldn't be against increasing tusk drop rate to 100% since every character can access better speed in autumn without rng anyway thanks to the beefalo buff

[sudoku]

Dst borrows elements from rogue-likes, a genre where randomness is a key attribute. Nothing is guaranteed and you continuously adapt. I, personally, enjoy this aspect of DST, especially because i only play on pubs, so any added randomness to the same autum start is appreciated.

The only thing that i can think of that is truly hindered by rng is the krampus sack, but only if you deem it a necessary upgrade instead of a rare luxury one. 

[Cloakingsumo198]

I just want more alternate ways to achieving the same thing...

[SapoLover]

2 hours ago, Cheggf said:

If you were meant to fight him then it would be like misery where BEFORE starting the fight you would enable it, then it gives extra rewards.

That argument is very solid. I lost. Here's your prize:

 A balloon frog.

(Now I'm wondering why they made a punishment phase for Klaus. Wouldn't be easier to just make him dissapear after you kill one of his deers? You are not forced to beat him, you can run away and wait until he despawns. I think he exist just for the challenge)

[Baark0]

23 hours ago, goatt said:

I know. And I know all the workaround you mentioned. Because I'm experienced and I'm knowledgeable, my complaint and reasoning has its value.

Source: bro trust me

[goatt]

23 minutes ago, Baark0 said:

Source: bro trust me

I mean, that was in addition to the numbers listed. Of course, I hope you use empathy.

[Cheggf]

3 hours ago, DeadWhereX said:

That argument is very solid. I lost. Here's your prize:

 A balloon frog.

(Now I'm wondering why they made a punishment phase for Klaus. Wouldn't be easier to just make him dissapear after you kill one of his deers? You are not forced to beat him, you can run away and wait until he despawns. I think he exist just for the challenge)

Klaus instantly despawning into nothing for no reason is a lot worse than an in-universe enrage mechanic seen in many games. It also gives you a chance to finish the fight if you accidentally enrage him near the end, although that's pretty unlikely. 

[goblinball]

10 hours ago, Cheggf said:

because enraged Klaus is a punishment.

Why not have it be both a punishment and an optional challenge with a bonus reward at the same time?

[ArubaroBeefalo]

8 hours ago, DeadWhereX said:

That argument is very solid. I lost. Here's your prize:

 A balloon frog.

(Now I'm wondering why they made a punishment phase for Klaus. Wouldn't be easier to just make him dissapear after you kill one of his deers? You are not forced to beat him, you can run away and wait until he despawns. I think he exist just for the challenge)

maybe because the 1st thing peoplo try when fighting him is to kill the deers. Despawning wont have sense and wont be as funny as suddenly being destroyed by an angry giant klaus

[Baark0]

13 hours ago, goatt said:

I mean, that was in addition to the numbers listed. Of course, I hope you use empathy.

idk i didnt read the post lol

[Baark0]

19 hours ago, goatt said:

 I hope you use empathy.

dont know what u mean by this but sure thing bucko

[reallychina]

On 5/28/2022 at 9:05 PM, goatt said:

@ArubaroBeefalo You have completely missed point

Unfortunaty they all miss the point. The rng discussion always turns into some irrelevant argument about how one can adapt to the stupid rng, completely missing the point that its not like you cant brute force through any rng, but that brute forcing true rng is not indicative of engaging or even decent gameplay. You're only playing coin flips.

 

True rng would mean chester eyebone would spawn everywhere, there would be no pearl bottle to reveal her island, there would be no astral detector showing crab king, no pattern whatsoever in biome generation, archives and ruins could spawn anywhere etc.

[grm9]

I wonder why so less games use a very simple solution: create a hidden counter for killed creatures of same type. If the randomized drop of that creature drops on one of those deaths, counter resets. If the counter reaches a big enough number so multiplying it by the drop chance would result in getting 1, next kill drops the item guaranteedly.

So, TL;DR — just make it so if 99 Krampii didn't drop krampus sack (1% chance), the 100-th one drops a guaranteed one. If 3 volt goats didn't drop a horn (25% chance), 4-th killed one drops it guaranteedly etc.

[hhh2]

6 hours ago, grumm9690 said:

I wonder why so less games use a very simple solution: create a hidden counter for killed creatures of same type. If the randomized drop of that creature drops on one of those deaths, counter resets. If the counter reaches a big enough number so multiplying it by the drop chance would result in getting 1, next kill drops the item guaranteedly.

So, TL;DR — just make it so if 99 Krampii didn't drop krampus sack (1% chance), the 100-th one drops a guaranteed one. If 3 volt goats didn't drop a horn (25% chance), 4-th killed one drops it guaranteedly etc.

cuz added complexity. If the chance is going to exponentially get higher, why not just make it a higher chance anyway?

[grm9]

2 hours ago, hhh2 said:

cuz added complexity. If the chance is going to exponentially get higher, why not just make it a higher chance anyway?

Because higher chance still doesn't guarantee that you will get the drop after killing enough mobs, and I didn't even mention exponential growth, just guarantee at enough mobs killed.

[Cheggf]

9 hours ago, grumm9690 said:

I wonder why so less games use a very simple solution: create a hidden counter for killed creatures of same type. If the randomized drop of that creature drops on one of those deaths, counter resets. If the counter reaches a big enough number so multiplying it by the drop chance would result in getting 1, next kill drops the item guaranteedly.

So, TL;DR — just make it so if 99 Krampii didn't drop krampus sack (1% chance), the 100-th one drops a guaranteed one. If 3 volt goats didn't drop a horn (25% chance), 4-th killed one drops it guaranteedly etc.

Why have random drops at all if it's not possible to have even slightly worse than average luck? Games with bad luck mechanics use it to prevent exceptionally bad luck (such as guaranteeing the drop at 500 or 1,000 krampus), not remove bad luck entirely. 

[hhh2]

36 minutes ago, grumm9690 said:

Because higher chance still doesn't guarantee that you will get the drop after killing enough mobs, and I didn't even mention exponential growth, just guarantee at enough mobs killed.

yeah, nothing can be guaranteed if you are working with randomness, that's just the nature of it. I remember this one time i was playing SW trying to summon the quaken and it took 6 full trawl nets before he spawned. It also kinda defeats the purpose of it being random if you are just guaranteeded something after doing it enough.