A new solution to future mechanics

[HowlVoid]

So boulders huh? You could say they're heavy on the shoulders this patch...

I think as a community we've come at an impasse. To mega base or not to mega base?

I remember when deerclops first came and destroyed my small pitiful base. That was bonkers, I think I should stood around the rubbled and froze to death.

Anyways, bases are starting to butt heads with developers. Encroaching on their creativity as much as ours. 

I have a future proof solution that's very simple, and I'm sure mega bases won't mind since they use this feature often...

The option to disable structure distruction (with limits ofc). For now it could simply be destruction from rift boulders. 

Or a separate mode designed with megabases in mind. Elden ring has changes that only occur in pvp vs when one plays pve, this could be more of the same. "Survival" mode has the normal boulders, "Sandbox" mode has protections for bases.

One can have things as developers Invision it and another can be mindful to it's players' bases.

Otherwise... This is just going to keep happening.

[Guille6785]

I've been wanting 2 separate official gamemodes for a long time now and I really do think it's the only way to make everyone happy in the future, basically all survival sandboxes have them except DST, we could have something like a "classic" mode which would be the same as it is now and a "survivor" mode or similar which gets progressively harder over time, with harsher seasons, more mechanics like hound waves but with other dangerous mobs, etc

[HowlVoid]

2 minutes ago, Guille6785 said:

I've been wanting 2 separate official gamemodes for a long time now and I really do think it's the only way to make everyone happy in the future, basically all survival sandboxes have them except DST, we could have something like a "classic" mode which would be the same as it is now and a "survivor" mode or similar which gets progressively harder over time, with harsher seasons, more mechanics like hound waves but with other dangerous mobs, etc

It could certainly be the start of something new. As time goes on the devs could be more comfortable differentiating the two modes.

It's a foundation, I believe, is better to have now than later.

[Mysterious box]

I've said it for a long time and kept hoping for the opposite letting my hopes be dashed each time but I feel it's clear don't starve together cannot exist anymore as both a survival game and a sandbox in the same space going forward and content is boxing itself in around the idea that the base building element is the priority above all else making everything feel tame and calculated. We're not surviving in the wild the world is actively trying it's best not to inconvenience or challenge us.

I agree we need a separate mode or sequel with new ground to trend because as it is anything built solely around being convenient for base building is never going to appeal to anyone but base builders.

[Mike23Ua]

So what your saying is we need to actually use the world presets and content sliders the game has had for forever and everyone kept criticizing me over when I brought up as a completely Valid solution?

Hmm interesting..

I’ve said since I first joined these forums that these were Klei’s answer, but everyone kept saying that they don’t want to bother with toggles, or be forced to turn something off, or play beyond the “Default” experience.

Thing is: these same people have openly admitted to turning off disease and wildfires. They’re ALREADY going beyond the default..

So really what harm is a couple more toggles going to do?

Boulders: Destructive/Non-Destructive.

As an example I LOVE the Taking Root Lunar Rifts- and in their current form they feel like they’re just as easily DAY ONE content as they are late game.. this may change in the FUTURE when Klei adds more updates to the game but-

What’s preventing me from toggling on the parts of the content I enjoy, while opting out of whatever may be too difficult for me that’s destined to come later?

CURRENTLY the only limitation is that Klei fails to give these toggles and presets the time and attention they deserve to truly be able to alter your game/playstyle.

And that’s everything I’ve been fighting to bring to their attention since I first joined these forums.

[maxwell_winters]

8 minutes ago, Mysterious box said:

snip

I don't think Klei ever stopped seeing DST as a survival game, They just didn't have time for new survival challenges in the past years because character reworks and ocean content were in priority. However, people got too comfortable with no active threats being added. I remember a lot of whining when people lost their "save haven" in the ocean when the monkey raids were introduced. (They are in a horrible state but I think people would still complain if they were more tolerable).

It must be very frustrating for the devs when they introduce stuff they see fit for the game and then a bunch of people come out and say "this will ruin the game for me".

[Pticman]

Again this conversation of dividing people into 2 groups of people, megabasers and "normal players". Every long world in the dst comes in the end to expanding the base, this content is oriented on the lategame, and base building is the big part of it.

And again, the main problem was not the boulders falling on the structures, it is okay to add new threats to the base. The issue was that you can't prevent it. Almost no warning, no defence systems. It is not challenge, it is griefing. Dst was always about problems/solutions, boulders added the problem without solution.

Now the boulders stopped to be challenging at all, not threatening neither the base player nor the player himself, which is boring direction in my opinion I agree. It could be made much better to keep the boulders in threatening to the base spot while still adding the ways to prevent/avoid them. The conversation of different players playstyles is really nonproductive.

[Theukon-dos]

I feel like the assumption that anything that increases the game's challenge must also destroy bases is an inheritly flawed one. A lot of comparisons to the Uncompromising Mode mod have been drawn with this beta; likely because it too used to include Acid Rain. But UM's never tried to actively destroy your base, atleast not in a way that wasn't easy to prevent. 

 

I still maintain that the game can't truly evolve without changing what it already has; which includes getting more challenging. But there are better ways to do so than "A few rocks try to fall on you."

[GenomeSquirrel]

Honestly though, if it’s not damaging my inventory, it’s not making the game harder, I might lose morale after losing a few toys, but food is still everywhere, combat needs just armor and weapon, and a few inventory slots manage the seasons. Boulders are more nihilistic boredom that something that will make my meters go down.

[Mysterious box]

9 minutes ago, Theukon-dos said:

I feel like the assumption that anything that increases the game's challenge must also destroy bases is an inheritly flawed one. A lot of comparisons to the Uncompromising Mode mod have been drawn with this beta; likely because it too used to include Acid Rain. But UM's never tried to actively destroy your base, atleast not in a way that wasn't easy to prevent. 

 

I still maintain that the game can't truly evolve without changing what it already has; which includes getting more challenging. But there are better ways to do so than "A few rocks try to fall on you."

But that's not the point being made the point is challenges shouldn't have to go out of their way to avoid the player and I'd argue thinking about it as challenges could be flawed in and of itself as it assumes a end point ideally in a on going survival game aspects of survival shouldn't end until the game is over at least in my opinion.

The boulder mechanic is bad now because it doesn't threaten your survival in a meaningful way. The rain mechanic is flawed now because your armor removes the need to acknowledge it like imagine if normal rain was completely blocked by using a football helm.

Not every new mechanic needs to threaten base but as it stands outside of summer the caves have no threats to base. I want content that will not only effect base but effect the world around us that impacts in a way beyond we seek out this thing beat it up and exploit it. But yea your probably right that the game will have to fundamentally change for this to happen.

33 minutes ago, Pticman said:

Against this conversation of dividing people into 2 groups of people, megabasers and "normal players". Every long world in the dst comes in the end to expanding the base, this content is oriented on the lategame, and base building is the big part of it.

This assumes that everyone just focuses on base building in the end and have stopped caring about survival and if that's the case why not have a mode where the survival aspect doesn't matter anymore? Why specifically deprived people who are here for the survival aspect?

[Pticman]

25 minutes ago, Mysterious box said:

This assumes that everyone just focuses on base building in the end and have stopped caring about survival and if that's the case why not have a mode where the survival aspect doesn't matter anymore? Why specifically deprived people who are here for the survival aspect?

I don't understand what challenges and survival aspects do you want. After surviving for a long time in dst all survival aspects become less and less relevant. At some point surviving becomes thriving, and thriving is connected to the development of the base. Can you please describe how do you see the gameplay on the server after let's say 500 days than all challenges are done? What would you do next? What survival challenges do you want to be added to the game? I am just curious.

[abrocator]

No? The premise about survival vs. “basing” is wrong.

What actually threatens late-game bases in this game? Being annoyed enough that you get emotionally distressed to the point that you mess something up.

DST doesn’t have late-game threats to bases. It just have eye-rolls over the same old same old, heere we go again with Deerclops and the hound waves and the worm waves and the Antlion earthquakes and the

Okay so I never “megabase“ (I don’t even “megachest”), but I never feel that my base is threatened in the late game. And I would be very, very upset if it were. Not because I’m an architect but because I’m a lazy builder (if I build a structure there then I expect it to stay there forever. Dangit I’m not rebuilding anything.)

So I must say that the “uncompromising” camp (not the mod, just people who chant “uncompromising wilderness survival game” like it’s still 2013) are just wrong because the classic game doesn’t have survival mechanics that threaten the base. Maybe Brightshades, though? Hmm. Well if they want to turn that up again I guess I see their point.

But on the whole, DS/DST has always relied too much on silly homing-missile threats wrt. “survival”: someone sent hounds after you (...who?) so now you must get-out-of-base; Deerclops knows where you are (or your structures?) so now you must get-out-of-base; the volcano is erupting so now you must sail out to the middle of the ocean and zig-zag around like an idiot for three minutes.

That’s “uncompromising survival”.

The truth is that the best survival mechanics were always about drawing you out of your comfort zone (often your base) because you either had to or really, really wanted something over there. And SW and Hamlet did that masterfully. But DST, aka RoG on steroids? Eh, it’s just a big island that you can walk around in 3–5 days uninterrupted (lol just keep running, nothing can catch you). It has no mandatory way-over-there things like the Aporcalypse Calendar.

[MostMerryTomcat]

I don't see why certain people are so hang on the "Boulders in Earthquakes" thing.

Does this rather uninspired mechanic bring something new to the proverbial Survival table? What exactly?

Does any of you apologists believe an experienced advanced player, able to solo both CC and AFw, would be somehow done-in by random boulders falling around? Hampered in any way? Do the Boulders provide some needed resource ("big risks, big rewards") you will surely use, mine in this particular case, and not solely forget where they felt? Does anyone think there is some special skill involved into running further away from a camp to not have it squashed in that tiny interval game announces an Earthquake?

I really don't get why some of you seem to fancy so much said "Boulders in Earthquakes" shenanigan when it would be so much more interesting and fun to have it substitute with something else, more engaging as opposed to "run a bit around, have space litter with boulders" - ideas for what were plenty.

Spoiler

As a side note, I would really want to see your bases @HowlVoid, @Mysterious box. Because I have a feeling you either nomad, or have a place where you dump stuff arbitrarily, loot on ground and whatnot - so of course is of no consequence for you and others of such behavior if something gets squashed or the whole ground becomes littered. Or rather, there isn't anything to be squashed (nomad/micro-camp with randomly thrown stuff). There's also the possibility you solely rush. While a most-valid play-style, most rushers finish their play-session within 100-150 in-game days, at which point reset world occurs - once more: nothing of substance build or lost. In which case certainly there's no real investment, outside of personal time records. But this isn't how all people play the game. Had a similar case with my way of playing (semi-nomad, minimal Cave camp, no farms at all, no transplanted plants aside 4-5 Stone Fruit Bushes from seedlings and some decorative Bushes) and the Deadly Brightshades problem: their existence across the world had no bearing on me whatsoever, outside of cases where I chose to engage then. I could easily be in the "Bruh, Shades be easy, bru, only need kite, brrr, U no kite skill, b?! Bridshadu best, stroks survival!" camp. Yet I admit their spawn bias, namely their repeated pop in same place on-and-on to become extremely tedious to handle for enjoyable play-time on long term.

[Mysterious box]

56 minutes ago, MostMerryTomcat said:

I don't see why certain people are so hang on the "Boulders in Earthquakes" thing.

Does this rather uninspired mechanic bring something new to the proverbial Survival table? What exactly?

Does any of you apologists believe an experienced advanced player, able to solo both CC and AFw, would be somehow done-in by random boulders falling around? Hampered in any way? Do the Boulders provide some needed resource ("big risks, big rewards") you will surely use, mine in this particular case, and not solely forget where they felt? Does anyone think there is some special skill involved into running further away from a camp to not have it squashed in that tiny interval game announces an Earthquake?

I really don't get why some of you seem to fancy so much said "Boulders in Earthquakes" shenanigan when it would be so much more interesting and fun to have it substitute with something else, more engaging as opposed to "run a bit around, have space litter with boulders" - ideas for what were plenty.

It's not that boulders are important or even that it needs to be boulders it's the fact that we're heading into a trend where base and content are starting to exist in a separate spaces outside of the game why do we have to be in love with the idea that nothing we do will have any meaningful impact on the world beyond turning it into a theme park to laugh in charlie, them, and the moon's faces collectively? If they scrapped the mechanic entirely and replaced it with something more meaningful but carried a similar weight I would have been fine.

56 minutes ago, MostMerryTomcat said:

As a side note, I would really want to see your bases @HowlVoid, @Mysterious box. Because I have a feeling you either nomad, or have a place where you dump stuff arbitrarily, loot on ground and whatnot - so of course is of no consequence for you and others of such behavior if something gets squashed or the whole ground becomes littered. Or rather, there isn't anything to be squashed (nomad/micro-camp with randomly thrown stuff). There's also the possibility you solely rush. While a most-valid play-style, most rushers finish their play-session within 100-150 in-game days, at which point reset world occurs - once more: nothing of substance build or lost. In which case certainly there's no real investment, outside of personal time records. But this isn't how all people play the game. Had a similar case with my way of playing (semi-nomad, minimal Cave camp, no farms at all, no transplanted plants aside 4-5 Stone Fruit Bushes from seedlings and some decorative Bushes) and the Deadly Brightshades problem: their existence across the world had no bearing on me whatsoever, outside of cases where I chose to engage then. I could easily be in the "Bruh, Shades be easy, bru, only need kite, brrr, U no kite skill, b?! Bridshadu best, stroks survival!" camp. Yet I admit their spawn bias, namely their repeated pop in same place on-and-on to become extremely tedious to handle for enjoyable play-time on long term.

Gonna be real here this is the equivalent of me saying I bet you play using super god mode to play through content and sit around and base build this isn't how people play. Could even be true but either way it's not bringing anything good to this conversation except trying to put someone down and invalidate their opinion through contempt.

58 minutes ago, Pticman said:

I don't understand what challenges and survival aspects do you want. After surviving for a long time in dst all survival aspects become less and less relevant. At some point surviving becomes thriving, and thriving is connected to the development of the base. Can you please describe how do you see the gameplay on the server after let's say 500 days than all challenges are done? What would you do next? What survival challenges do you want to be added to the game? I am just curious.

When you say thriving is connected to the development of base do you mean aesthetically or functionally? Because I see that as the dividing factor when I base it ends up quite large but everything in the base has a function this isn't to say I don't use skins or organize things but I build for function not aesthetic that doesn't mean I suddenly don't care about my base and wouldn't mind if it got smashed to pieces and I feel it's bold to assume everyone builds for aesthetic that I should feel compelled to start over after x amount of days of doing things.

58 minutes ago, Pticman said:

What survival challenges do you want to be added to the game? I am just curious.

Here's a thought what should we as a community expect from not just this arc but content going forward in this "end game" more toys to decorate our bases? More optional bosses shoved in some odd corners of the map? New resources we bring back to base once and never need to interact with again? Have we reached a end point where nothing meaningful can or will ever happen to this world?

 

Edit: This might be a bit off topic but to better get my point across because I understand sometimes I'm bad at that. I enjoyed the concept of moon quay I really did it got me excited for the future of the game when the beta launched as I thought our feedback would get it tweaked to a healthy state and it would become the standard for ocean survival. What instead happened was it was hidden with nuked spawn rates and none of the issues with it addressed and then given a flare to people who felt like "experiencing it." Making it a slap in the face for people who loved it conceptually and people who hated it completely. This patch feels like history repeating itself.

[lakhnish]

The thing with the boulders is that once the EQ started and you were already next to say your chest, it was too late to prevent the boulder from coming on top since it tracked where you were (at least that was the problem for me).

If we were given the opportunity to move out of the way (like with Antlion boulders), then the boulders wouldn't have been that big a deal.

Instead Klei gave us this weird solution where the boulders will still fall on top of you, but just not around your structures, which is a very odd solution.